House Standing Committee on Housing

Good morning. I'd like to call the order the House Committee on Housing Public hearing for Friday, February 7th. It's 9am in the morning on the dot and we are in Conference Room 430 here. Thank you for joining us in person and on Zoom.

Before we jump into our agenda, just some housekeeping notes for those who are here to testify. We will, in order to allow as many people as possible to testify, we'll have a two minute time limit per testifier.

Because morning hearings must adjourn prior to floor session, it is possible that not all testifiers may have the opportunity to testify in that event. Please know that your written testimony will be considered by the Committee. For those on Zoom, please keep yourself muted and your video off while waiting to testify.

And after your testimony is complete, the Zoom chat function will allow you to chat with the technical staff only. Please use the chat function only for technical issues. If you're 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 that the house is not responsible for any bad Internet connections. On the testifier's end, please avoid using any trademarked or copyrighted images and please refrain from profanity or uncivil behavior. Such behavior may be grounds for removal from the hearing without the ability to rejoin.

But we always have amazing and nice kind testifiers here in Housing, so I don't think we'll get to that point. That said, first item on the agenda is HB 1432, relating to housing. Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC in support. Thank you. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify on this matter before us. Seeing none.

Chair Members, any questions? All right, Seeing none. Next item on the agenda is HB 1428 relating to housing. Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC in support. Thank you. Hawaiian Community Assets in support. Hawaiian Community Assets. Chelsea Evans in support.

She is on Zoom. Ms. Evans, are you on Zoom? You are?

Aloha.

Aloha.

Thank you. For me? Yes. My name is Chelsea Evans. I'm with Hawaiian Community Assets, the Executive Director here. We are Hawaii's largest HUD certified housing counseling agency serving residents statewide. Definitely here to support this Bill. As we all know, Hawaii is in a housing crisis.

And while we are increasing affordable housing projects, many of these developments, both for renters and home buyers, are requiring financial education workshops before they can move in. But without funding, our agencies that provide this education, HUD certified education, are struggling to kind of meet the demand.

We also know that affordable housing isn't just about building units, but making sure that families can be able to qualify to move in and sustain their living arrangement. And our HUD certified counseling services have data that show that we can decrease eviction, support people through foreclosure, try to help people stabilize their financial situations.

So yeah, overall, we just wanted to say mahalo to Speaker Nakamura for being able to have a conversation with us about kind of this part of the affordable housing piece that's been missing for a little bit.

Thank you. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 1428.

Members. Any questions? See none. Next item is HP833 relating to community Land Trust Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC in support. Thank you, County of Hawaii Office of Housing and Community Development and support. Nahale Omaui in support. Kohala Trust Land. Kohala Community Land Trust in support. Beth Robinson, Are you able to connect? Can you hear us?

I can. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to just be present today and thank you all so much for your support of the Community Land Trust model. We are the newest of the now six active community Land Trusts in Hawaii.

We have done this not by ourselves, but very much with the support of the other operating Community Land Trusts. And so we just wanted to add our voice to say that everything that the Legislature can do to support the Community Land Trust movement is going to prevent the need to keep supporting new affordable housing in the future.

It will keep a base of the housing stock affordable in perpetuity. It's truly community governed and run and we would hope that you would also consider adding Community Land Trust in the Kohala Community Land Trust to the others enumerated in the preamble to this really wonderful Bill. Mahalo.

Thank you, Lahaina Community Land Trust and Support.

Aloha Committee. Thank you so much for hearing this Bill. My name is Autumn Ness. I'm the Executive Director of the Lahaina Community Trust. A few quick examples of why this is so important and some details about how to ensure it's actually useful.

In Lahaina CLT's case, a large portion of our initial funding came from county funds that was $15 million of entirely reimbursable grants. So I have to come up with $15 million in order to spend and get reimbursed by the county.

I have spent months piecing together an internal line of credit so we don't have to pay market rate interest on a loan and negotiating a market line of credit with a bank.

But that required us to find a larger partner to back our line of credit and then buy the interest rate down for us, bring your interest rate down to 2%, which is really, really low. But that's still money that's not going to go into our program work.

All of that time is missed opportunities and parcels that we weren't able to purchase because we didn't have the capital at the time. And the pace of real estate is crazy and it's taken so much time and energy off of our work.

The price per unit when you talk about land and homes is so big in this work that the cost of capital even for a short term loan is substantial and is less money going toward our work. So really quick, while I'm here, a couple of things for acquisition.

Depending on the funding source, getting the money back from the funding source to repay this line of credit could take, you know, months.

And then for construction, if this line of credit is used to construct, construct a home, the money would be taken out of the line of credit and then construction happens and then the money is recouped almost, not entirely because it's subsidized when the home is sold.

So the repayment terms for this line of credit really matter and a year is likely, in a lot of cases, not enough. So a two year repayment terms would be really, really useful at least.

And then the other last thing I want to say is there needs to be a clear path to access this line of credit like a pre approval or something.

Because if the land trust needs to move on an acquisition and still has to go through the application process to access this line of credit, the opportunity to acquire that piece of land may be lost.

So predetermining who is qualified to buy this and how they can access it so they can move at the speed of real estate is a really important part of this process and making it successful. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Autumn Next we got Limby Hawaii in support, Maui Chamber of Commerce in support and two individuals in support. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on this matter?

Peter Savio I'm a local housing affordable housing developer and I strongly support the trust concept. We have failed at providing affordable housing over the last 60 years. We're going to continue to fail because everybody looks at supply as the solution. Our problem is demand.

The only way to control demand is to put the properties in trust for the local workers where we can control the resale, keep the values tied to income. Everything else you're doing is going to fail. You failed for 60 years, you're going to fail again. You're building rental housing.

Worst thing you can do in this market unless the rental housing is community owned. All we're doing is making developers wealthy. We're not making our community wealthy. We're giving away our wealth. And it's because you're using a supply model, a supply solution instead of the problem demand.

Outside demand is driving our price up has driven up 7 to $800,000. Our affordable houses are not affordable. Everybody's excited because they're cheaper than $1.0 million house. But a local wage earner cannot buy our affordable homes. It's an illusion. The trust is the hope. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on this HB833 seeing none.

Chair Members Any questions? Seeing none Next item on the agenda is HP1009 relating to the dwelling unit revolving fund.

Vice Chair for the testimony HHFDC in support.

Vice Chair Members HSFDC is in strong support of this Bill. Two years ago the Legislature authorized a pilot program for the DURF equity pilot program and it's been very successful. There are now 81 units in the program and $7.4 million of the $10 million that was allocated has been committed to projects.

And what's great about this program making it permanent is that it can be combined with DERF loans to provide equity for for sale projects. With this high interest rate environment that we're in, many for sale projects are stalled. So by putting in some state equity that could allow those projects to proceed.

And again this is a financially stable revolve. The funds do revolve when the buyer sells their home, the state gets back its equity and shared appreciation that could be invested into future project. So we think this is a great program to see it be made permanent.

Thank you Dean. D Bed in support and one individual in support. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB1009 seeing none chair Members Any questions?

Seeing none. Next item on the agenda is HP529 relating to state finances. Vice Chair for the testimony.

HEFDC in support.

And.

Thank you and Department of Budget and Finance with comments. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB529 seeing none Chair. Members any questions?

Any questions? Seeing none next item is HP432 relating to the rental housing revolving fund Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC in support.

Standard testimony, support Just to provide some background, the reason why we're requesting a sub account is that the way Arch restructured right now is that it prioritizes Low Income Housing Tax Credit project. So for projects at 60% AMI and below.

But there's also a need for right housing for those above 60% AMI who are at 65% AMI, 80% AMI. So this sub account will provide funding for those kind of projects. Rental projects.

Thank you. Department of Budget and Finance with comments. Office of Housing from the City and County of Honolulu in support. The Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii in support. Hollomua Collaborative in support.

Josh.

Thank you Hawaii Appleseed in support. Susan Lee. Hawaii YIMBY in support. Michael's development and support. Limby Hawaii with comments on Zoom Hawaii Community Foundation, Title Guarantee, HPM Building Supply, Mana Up, Hawaii Gas and Tory Richards also in support. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB432?

Seeing none chair.

Thank you Members. Any questions? Dean, I have a question for you and it's okay if you don't have the answer right now, but approximately what is the average per unit RHRF allocation for a Tier one project and the average for a Tier two project? I know it's going to vary based on income.

For a tier one project, I believe it's about $160,000 per year unit. I'd have to get back to you for the tier 2 project average.

Okay, thank you very much. Members any further questions? All right, seeing none. Next item on the agenda is HP419 leading to housing Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC in support. Thank you. Limby Hawaii in opposition. Grassroots Institute of Hawaii in support. Thank you. Maui Chamber of Commerce with comments. One individual in support and three in opposition. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB419?

Seeing that chair, Members, any questions? Actually I have another question, Dean. Typically for at the councils, are they approving these over multiple readings or is it possible for them to approve it in a in a single reading at council?

It is possible. There are times when the council has expressed that they don't have enough time, but in most cases it it has been possible to meet the deadline.

And does it come to them in in the form of a resolution for approval?

We do provide a draft resolution to the council. Yes.

Okay. Okay. Thank you very much Members. Any further questions? All right, seeing none. Next item is HP 527 related to.

Housing. Vice Chair for the testimony HHFDC in support. Thank you. Department of Planning and Permitting in opposition. Lahaina Strong in opposition. Limby Hawaii in opposition. Housing Hawaii's future in support. Grassroots Institute and support. Thank you. And two individuals in opposition. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 527 seeing none chair Members.

Any questions? Seeing none. Next item is HB416 relating to housing. Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC with comments. Thank you. Office of Planning and Sustainable Development with comments. Thank you. Department of Planning and Permitting in opposition. Hawaii Apple Seed and support. Lahaina Strong in opposition. Housing Hawaii's Future in support. Grassroots Institute of Hawaii in support. Thank you. Maui Chamber of Commerce in support and two individuals in opposition.

Anyone online or in person wishing to testify on HB416 seeing none Chair.

Members, any questions? I have a question for OPSD. Mary Alice. Good morning. There were some concerns in testimony regarding possible bypassing of approval processes for development on rural or agricultural land.

So currently, even if this were to pass, correct me if I'm wrong, but the LUC would still have to approve a 201H project on non urban zone land.

Yes. As the law currently stands, they would have to do, unless it's less than 15 acres, they'd have to do a district boundary amendment and then if it's already designated as IL, that adds a another layer of protection for those lands.

Okay, thank you so much. And then question for Dean. Good morning. So the Bill is just for projects that have 201H projects that have a financing commitment from the state. And what percentage of 201H projects receive state financing?

We're seeing that the majority of 201H projects are LIHTC projects. So I would say in recent years about 90% of those have a financing commitment. We'll get a financing commitment.

And was that different in the past in lower interest rate environments or would you expect it to be different in the future?

We hope that as interest rates come down that there'll be more for sale projects that don't use state financing.

Okay. And then so as this Bill is drafted though, if it doesn't receive state financing, then it would still go through the typical county approval process, right? Yes. Okay. All right, thank you very much. Oh, Rep Grandinetti.

Thank you, Dean. I was wondering how at a maximum, how long is county approval holding up 201H projects?

Well, by statute I believe the council has 45 days. So in most cases they work within that time frame.

Okay, thank you.

Members. Further questions? All right, seeing none. Next item on the agenda is HP 417 relating to the rental housing revolving fund. Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC in support. Thank you. Department of Budget and Finance with comments. OLOMUA Collaborative in Support. Thanks Josh. Title Guarantee HPM Building Supply Mana of Tory Richards and Hawaii Gas in support. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on the matter before us.

Seeing none Chair Members any questions? Actually sorry Dean, I got a question for you again. Your testimony referenced that because this could be used for for sale projects that there needs to be more of a distinction possibly between this new sub account and derf.

Yes.

Could you elaborate a little bit on.

I guess historically RHRF has been used for rental housing hence its name while DERF has been used for broader purposes such as for sale housing.

So by allowing for sale RHRF to be used for, for sale housing it 1 it seems misnomer with its name and 2 it seems like projects could apply for either RRF or DIRF for, for sale financing which is oh nice to have options but I think it also good to help consolidate into one fund also.

And could there be value in RHRF being utilized possibly for like if a project has mixed for sale and rental right now is it are they like possibly splitting fund types for the or or splitting the project in two to take advantage of both funds and could there be an advantage to RHRF having more flexibility?

We don't see many split for sale and rental projects. There are some and in those cases typically the for sale side is just privately financed. But I suppose it could be RHF could be used to provide financing for the for sale side also. Okay, there's a mixed project.

Okay, that's helpful. Thank you. Members further questions? Seeing none. Next item on the agenda is HB418. Vice Chair for the testimony.

For the testimony HHFDC with comments.

Just like to note that respect to a working group for our qualified allocation plan. We do have a working group that we are standing up and the meeting invites went out and we're having our first meeting I believe in two weeks. So perhaps there's not a need to establish a working group.

Thank you. Thank you. Office of Housing City and County of Honolulu with comments the Chamber of Commerce Hawaii in support HONUA Collaborative in support.

Thank you Josh which again will stand on our testimony. Thank you.

Thank you. Maui Chamber of Commerce in support Limby Hawaii with comments Mana UP and title guarantee in support anyone online or in person wishing to testify on HB418.

Members. Any questions? Yes, Rep. Gandenetti.

My question is for Dean. Can you share a little bit about the makeup of the new working group?

The new working group will be open to any member of the public. So we sent out emails to those who use LIHTC. We went out to the housing chairs and other stakeholders involved in housing but it's on our website the meeting notice anyone can attend.

That's exciting. Thank you.

Members, further questions?

Further questions. All right, seeing none. Next item on the agenda is HB 1411 relating to housing preference. Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC with comments. Thank you. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify on HB 1411? Seeing none Chair. Members, any questions?

Members, any questions? Yes, Rep. Moroko.

I guess this would be for Dean maybe you know, for the preference what happens if that individual should change their job?

That's a good question. I think that's something we'd have to address administrative rules where they could stay there for a period of time but then they might have to leave and.

Then just a follow on how long. Would they have to be at their. Current job in order to qualify.

Again, that's something you probably would have to address an administrative rule rules right now it's There is no minimum requirement. Thank you Members.

Members any further questions? Seeing none. Next item on the agenda is HP374 housing Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC with comments. AG's office with comments.

Good morning Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. I'm Deputy Attorney General, Chase Suzumoda and we have provided our written comments on House Bill 374. In our testimony, we suggest amendments to.

This bill by moving removing the duration requirement specifically on page one line 17 through page two line line three to avoid any challenges for violations of the constitutional right to travel. And I am available if you have any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Addison Bulusan in support. Council Member Fern Holland in support and Hawaii State Association of Counties in support. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB374? Seeing none Chair.

Members, any questions? No? On yeah, sorry. See none. Next item is HP 373 relating to housing Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC in support. Thank you. Maui County Council. Chair Alice Lee, in support City and County of Honolulu Office of Housing. Thank you. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 373 signature Members, any questions?

All right, Signa and last item on the agenda. HB 1492 relating to affordable housing. Vice Chair for the testimony.

HHFDC in support. Thank you. AARP in support. LIMBY Hawaii in support. Angela Young, CARES, Community Advocacy Research Education Services with comments on Zoom. And three individuals in support. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 1492? Seeing none, Chair.

Members any questions? Mr. Savio, did you want to come testify? What bill is this? 1492. This is your bill.

My bill? The bill some Senators are working. This is on the trust.

Yes. We will give you the opportunity to testify if you'd like.

Yeah, we definitely have to solve our housing crisis. We should have learned from the last 60 to 70 years. Building is not a solution. Controlling the market is. You need the trust. The trust is the foundation from which we can build a solution to create an affordable market where housing will be affordable forever and it's relatively simple.

It's no different than what we're doing now. The only thing we're going to change is who gets the financial benefits and who ends up owning the property. Because in every case the rental building or the units leaseholder fee will go into the trust and they will be protected for the whole term or forever wages will determine appreciation.

We have created a market that would be Hawaii's real estate market if we did not have all of this distortion from outside buyers. It's the practical solution and it will work and it's doing what we're doing now except we're going to keep all the financial benefits for our people. I encourage you to pass it. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on this matter before us? Seeing none, Chair.

Members questions? I have a question for Mr. Savio. So we've there's a number of community land trust bills on the agenda today is one. We've had some bills relating to voluntary deed restriction markets.

I guess my question is how, what are your expected outcomes from this report that differ from the direction that we're going with community land trust and even support for, you know, our HRF and RHRF.

I think the land trust I'm talking about is much more extensive than anything the other groups are looking at. This is a trust that will hold rental buildings, fee simple buildings, leasehold buildings, every residential affordable unit. It will be community controlled, not government controlled but the government needs to help set it up.

It will have every financial program, it will be standardized. Right now we have all kinds of affordable programs but we're shooting arrows all over the place. Whereas if you have it in the trust we end up with one program and we can explain the pro or maybe a few programs but we can explain it.

Lenders will understand it, appraisals will understand it, escrow will understand it, buyers will understand it. And you've solved the fear of the affordable housing and the confusion over all the restrictions. The key is the ownership cannot be sold on an open market because the mainland buyer will outbid us every time.

So we have to have a mechanism to keep it in this trust where the local buyers are given preference.

And I guess the question for me then still is, do we need a report to do this? When say we have on our agenda today a bill to give low interest financing to community land trusts. What about just a priority structure in that? Low interest financing for this type of land trust?

Giving low interesting financing is one solution of 30. What about the other 29? The key to the trust is it's going to be a statewide trust. It's going to end up holding hundreds of thousands of units. It is going to be the local market.

And if you have a lot of individual trust, I don't think it will work as well because you'll have different rules, different decisions. It has to be centralized to succeed. It's going to be a large market.

Every local person is probably going to end up putting their house, even if they're outside the market now, putting it in, because they'll benefit from it. So to have these individual trusts, they're good. But the master trust or the large trust or the state trust is what we need. It's got to hold everything.

It's got to hold all the programs. And it gives us the focus to see the problems, the solutions, what's working, what's not working.

I appreciate that clarification. So, and again, I guess we already have government owned leasehold properties with limited equity appreciation. So is that differing from those? Is it just trying to expand those types of programs?

Again, you're talking about one program to do affordable housing. It's not. Well, what we're doing now doesn't work. Okay, but we do build housing. We've built hundreds of thousands of units. The problem is none of them are affordable because once they get to the market, we lose them.

Okay, if we're going to do affordable housing, it has to be a focus, a commitment. You know, we're talking about building 50-60,000 homes in the next four or five years. Hundreds of thousands of homes probably in the next 10 years. The way we're doing it now will not work because there's no focus.

It's a lot of individual programs, a lot of great ideas. But they'll even work better if they're centralized in a trust and everybody's looking at with the same standards, the same rules, the same requirements. Right now, as a rule, we're happy when someone gives us an affordable unit. The city's building a whole bunch at $400,000.

One bedroom's at $400,000. Great. Cheaper than the market, but unaffordable. A one bedroom unit should be 200,000. Okay, so we're building affordable housings that aren't affordable if they're in the trust. We can then target those buildings and say, okay, here's what we're going to do to make that 400,000 unit available for $200,000. It can be done.

Having this. I mean, it's sort of like going to war. You're either going to have one General in charge, which is the master trust, or you're going to have 100 separate generals doing whatever they want to do. You're destined to fail. Right now, Hawaii is destined to fail. We have failed for 70 years.

Why you think what we're doing now is going to work, I have trouble comprehending because it hasn't worked. So the trust, to me is the solution. It also solves the constitutional issues because the state will establish it. Okay, so it's a government established trust, but it's again controlled by the public.

And given that, it sounds like you have a pretty clear idea of the direction that you think this trust should go. What? I guess, why do we have a bill for a report to look at this instead of a bill to actually establish?

This form of trust was prepared by a group of legislators who didn't think the Legislature was ready to actually approve the concept because they found it sort of new and revolutionary. And I said, guys, you take it and run with it. I'll come and try to explain it. They prepared the bill.

They thought it was the best way to start the dialogue. The response we've gotten at community meetings and everything so far is exactly what you're saying. Why don't you just go right to a trust? Let's set it up. The public believes it's going to work. They see it. It's a logical, simple solution. Maybe that's the problem.

The explanation seems simple. The actual structure is more complex. And this is something I've sort of created on my own with a few business people helping me.

But part of the advantage of taking time to set up the trust is it gives everyone in the community a chance to step forward with questions and challenges and create a better, you know, monster, if that's what you want to call it. Okay?

That's why in the book I wrote, I talk about setting up the trust is going to take maybe two or three years, but during that interim, there are things we can do to help solve the housing crisis immediately. And if we do those three or four things, we don't need the trust.

And by the time they're done, the trust will be there. And those three things were Hawaiian homes. It's already a controlled market because you can only sell to native Hawaiians and they have to be working here and living here. The other one is the rental market.

We should not approve rental projects that are owned by mainland or investors or owners. They should be owned by tenants or by the trust because then that building will be affordable forever. So we could approve the buildings now, and by the time they're built in one or two years, the trust should be established.

The 3rd One is Section 8. Section 8 is a home ownership program. Senator Inouye got it changed in 85, yet we only use it as a rental program. If we had used Section 8 as a homeownership program, we would have 30-40,000 Section 8 tenants owning their homes today. Paid off because they would have started in 85.

We missed the opportunity because we're asleep at the wheel. And I've complained about that for years, but nobody gets excited about it. The reality is it's part of the solution. So it's not one thing. It's 100 different programs all in one place, all with the same vision.

You know, it's sort of what Singapore did, where they have a Department that's all about housing. That's their job, right? That's what has to happen.

Thank you, Mr. Savio. Members, further questions? All right. I appreciate your enthusiasm. All right. Seeing no further bills, we are going to recess briefly.

Reconvening our 9 a.m. public hearing for the Housing Committee for decision making. For the first item on the agenda, HB 1432 related to housing. I recommend that we move forward in HD1 with technical amendments for clarity, consistency and style, and with a defected date. Members, any discussion or questions? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 1432. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] The recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Vice Chair Miyake. Next item is HB 1428 related to housing. I recommend that we move this out with a defected date and blank out the appropriation in the bill. Members, any discussion? Oh, sorry. Blank out the appropriation and reference the appropriation value in the Committee report. Yes. Rep. Pierick.

1428. Yes. Okay. So my understanding is this bill uses $5 million of taxes towards, like, helping people get counseling to understand how to not become homeless. We already pay taxes for the state library.

People can go to the Library, watch free YouTube videos on how to not become homeless, get a job, pay the rent and mortgage that way. I don't recommend we use more tax dollars for this kind of counseling. Instead, we use it elsewhere. So we voted no. Thank you. Appreciate your concerns. Members, further discussion.

Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 1428. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] The recommendation is adopted, Chair.

Thank you. Next item on the agenda is HP 833 relating to community land trusts. I recommend that we move this out with an HD1 with technical amendments for clarity, consistency and style, with a defected date to blank out the appropriation and mention the value in the Committee report.

And based on the testimony we got today to add Kohala Community Land Trust to the list of community land trusts in the preamble. Members, any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 833. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] Chair the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next item is HB 1009 related to the dwelling unit revolving fund. I recommend we move on HD1 with technical amendments with a defective date and to adopt HHFTC's amendments proposed in their testimony. Members Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 1009. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] The recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next item is HB529 related to state finances. I recommend that we move this out with an HD one with the defected date. Clarify that the Bill authorizes revenue bonds and blank out the value of the line of credit and reference it in the Committee report. Members, any questions or discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB5 to 9 the recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] Chair the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next item is HB432 relating to the rental housing revolving fund. I recommend that we defect the date tech amendments and define perpetual as the life of the project and blank out the appropriation and reference it in the Committee report. Members, any discussion or questions? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB432. The recommendation is to pass with amendments.[Roll Call] The recommendation is adopted.

Next item is HP 419. I will be deferring this bill. Today we have three separate bills related to 201H projects. I think they're all doing slightly different things.

I plan to only move one of those bills and I don't necessarily think that saving 15 days of the process will be all that significant and and so we'll be deferring HP 419. Next item is HB 527 relating to housing.

This prohibits the legislative body of accounting for making modifications to housing development proposals that would increase the cost of the project. I will also be deferring this bill. I think it is unclear what exactly that would mean.

DPP provided interesting testimony saying that essentially any revision to plans could be considered a cost increase and that that's going to know increase the cost of a consultant and so I think it's vague on what that means and potentially problematic as there might be minor changes that come through that everybody agrees on yet they couldn't go forward with that because that would increase costs.

So I will be deferring HB527. Next item is HB416 relating to housing. I do recommend that we move this forward for continued discussion. For me I am in broad agreement with some of the arguments brought up in testimony from Appleseed and Grassroots and others about the duplication of current processes.

I at least want to continue it forward so we can keep talking about this.

And I recommend then we move on HD1 with the defective date that we adopt the amendment proposed in testimony by HHFDC that we narrow it down so that only projects with financing commitments from the state that are within the urban state land use district can proceed without county legislative approval.

I think there's a big difference between projects in our urban area compared to rural agricultural land.

And I think certainly counties need authority for county councils need the authority to review those not in the urban district and then also give the planning Director the authority to reject a permit within 30 days but only based on infrastructure so they again planning Director would have the ability to reject but but only if there's a lack of infrastructure and that's all.

Members. Any discussion? Yes Rep. Grandinetti.

I am going to be voting no on this measure. I don't having heard from HHFTC that county approval is typically happening within the 45 day period. I don't see that as a significant barrier to construction.

But I do think that those 45 days and that engagement with the legislative can be leveraged by community to significantly improve projects. And at Kuilei Place, county involvement resulted in an increase of 105 affordable units that went from 24% to 35% and it doubled the period where the developer had to offer units first to Hawaii residents.

So I think that's a really important arena for the counties and the community to play a role. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Appreciate your concerns and your comments. And I just want to clarify my own position here. I'm not necessarily as concerned about the 45 day time period as about the idea that I think when it goes in front of a legislative body for approval, it's an opportunity for sort of personal exactions.

It's almost like any individual can hold a project up in order to get what they want out of that project. And I think that we should just have strictly defined standards in statute and in code for what we want to see out of these projects but entirely understand your concerns and respect them. Members further questions? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB416. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] The recommendation is adopted.

Thank you Vice Chair. Next item is HB417 relating to the rental housing revolving fund. I recommend that we move out on HD1 with tech amendments with the defected date and to not allow this to be used for for sale housing as the dwelling unit revolving fund can be used for that purpose and this was brought up by HHFDC in their testimony.

But I do want to make a note in the community report that I think this should be up for further discussion in that based on further exploration on whether there could be value and more flexibility in RHRF being able to be used for dual purposes. Members discussion? Seeing none.

Vice Chair for the vote voting on HB417. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] Chair the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you Vice Chair. Next item is HP418 related to housing. I will be deferring this bill as HFCC has already established a working group and and I don't think we need to establish a duplicate working group. Next item is HB 1411 relating to housing preference.

I recommend that we move on HD1 with the defected date and with tech amendments. Members any discussion? Seeing none, Vice Chair.

For the vote voting on HB 1411. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] The recommendation is adopted.

Next item is HB 374 relating to housing. Actually, sorry for decision making there. I got a call that I thought was Committee related but it's not. So we will, we will keep moving it. We are on 374. 374 HB 374 related to housing. Thank you guys.

I recommend we move out an HD1 here with Tech amendments for clarity, consistency and style with a defective date to delete the set aside for state or county workers and delete the returning resident language based on the AG's concerns that that's unconstitutional.

And I just want to quote the AG and their testimony here for total, you know, clarity and transparency on why we're moving that. In the testimony the AG said this preference appears to be a durational residency requirement that may be subject to talent challenge as violating the right to travel protected by the United States Constitution.

The right to travel, in addition to the right to enter and exit another state, the right to travel refers to the right to be treated like other citizens of that state and a state law that burdens this right, quote, unless shown to be necessary to promote a compelling government interest is unconstitutional.

So we will be removing that language in there. Members, any discussion? Yes, Rep. Pierick. No, the Five More Radius bill. Well, there's two which have a preference for radius so those the radius is still standing in both. Yeah. Thank you Members Further questions or discussion?

Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote, voting on HB374. The recommendation is to pass with amendments.[Roll Call] Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Vice Chair. Next item is HB373 relating to housing. I recommend that we defect the date that. And add clarifying language to preserve the amendments made by Act 45 Members, which is. Which is basically a technical amendment here. Members, any discussion? Seeing none.

Vice Chair for the vote voting on HB373. The recommendation is to pass with amendments.[Roll Call] Chair the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. HP 1492 relating to affordable housing. I will be deferring this. The Senate version is moving. I'm hoping that we can get more clarity from at least the introducers on that side on what the intention here was for the outcomes of this study.

I think we are doing a lot of work in this Committee to do exactly what the study is calling for. We've had a number of land trust bills. We had a bill to allocate $600 million to DHHL, which is a massive land trust. Every government finance housing project, I think, is.

Is in line with this, et cetera, et cetera. And so I think we are doing a lot of things. I personally would prefer to see a bill that establishes exactly what is intended here, and then we could deliberate that through the legislative process.

But I'm wary about appropriating money for a study with sort of undefined outcomes on what we want to see out of that study. So we're deferring it. If it comes over from the Senate, then we can continue to explore it and hopefully it's elaborated a little better in that version. All right.

Seeing no further business, this hearing is now adjourned.