Senate Standing Committee on Government Operations

Well, everybody, welcome to the decision making. We're Reconvening today, Thursday, February 6, 2025 at 3:00 p.m. for decision making on measures that were previously heard on January 30, 2025 in this room. Rec. We are convened in this room, conference room 225. The meeting is being streamed live on YouTube.

And the unlikely event we have to abruptly end this hearing due to technical difficulties. The Committee will reconvene to discuss any outstanding business at 3:01 p.m. Tuesday, Feb. 11, 2025 in room 225. And a public notice will be posted on the Legislature's website. With that, we'll go right into the decision making.

Yes, like I said, we will recess, I guess, and then we'll go into our Joint Hearing. That sounds good. Okay, we're going to recess and then we're this decision making while we get quorum then.

So then what we'll do is we're going to go into our Joint Hearing and then after that we'll recess again so we can get quorum to vote on the bills. Okay with that. Aloha, everybody.

We're beginning today's joint GVO LBT hearing on Thursday, February 6, 2025 at 3:05 p.m. and we just read the previous housekeeping amendment so we won't bother repeating them. First up, we have Senate Bill 444. First up to testify, we have Scott Nago, chief elections officer. They have comments on the measure. Luis Salaveria, Director of budget and finance.

We stand on our written testimony and opposition.

Okay, thank you so much. Brenna Hashimoto. DHRD. Thank you so much. Director. We have Director Tokioka DBED. They have submitted written in opposition. We have Randy Ferreira, President. I believe this testimony has been submitted marked wrong. I do believe they're in opposition. However, it's listed as support system. oh, it is opposition. Oh, you're here.

Do you want to come up and give us your opposition?

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Nui Sebast here with. With HGA. We are in opposition to this measure. Apologize, apologies for the error.

And the AFL CIO is also on opposition, correct? Correct. Okay, thank you for being here. We actually have HGA. We just had them come up and testify. That is all we have on 44 core. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to testify or anybody out there in Zoom? See, seeing none. Members questions of the testifier?

Okay, seeing none. We'll move on to the next Bill, which we are lead on, and that is Senate Bill 1091. And first up, we have DHERD. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Director. We have Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization, OMPA.

Hello Chairs, Vice Chairs, and Members of the Committee. I'm Kiana Otsuka. I'm with the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. We want to send in our test, sorry, testify in support of this Bill. I also want to note for the Committee, we helped create a study that's aligned with what's in the Bill and have them take questions on the study. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you so much. We have several individuals. Carolyn Kunitake, Kiana Otsuka, Molly Marimal, and Julie Kuo, and Nathan Duby all have submitted written testimony in support. Any of them here or in Zoom? Seeing none. We also have the comptroller with late testimony.

Chairs, Members. Keith Regan, comptroller for the Department of Accounting and General Services. We stand on our written testimony providing comments on this measure, and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much for the comments. That concludes 1091. Members, are there any questions of the comptroller? Yes.

No, I have a question of Director Hashimoto. So, you did the telework policy general for the state, and I noticed in your testimony, you're saying that you should not be involved in helping in these work assignments.

You would be doing consultation with DAGS. DAGS would look at how they assign spaces for remote work and wouldn't DHRD be involved in terms of work?

So, DHRD's role—and thank you for that question—DHRD's role and responsibility, when it comes to telework, is to provide the overall framework that permits employees to remote work.

So, our, our role is more from the human resources perspective and providing guidance to departments about how to implement and how to, to address issues that come up, with regard to employees and how to manage employees.

But really, when it comes to workspaces and what that means, in terms of how much space is allotted for a particular department, that's really not our...so, we would defer to DAGS and the Department, to work out any issues related to hoteling, or space needs, or lease agreements, or anything like that.

We're of course available to answer questions, but we don't feel like we need to interfere with that interchange between DAGS and the Department.

So, in eliminating DHRD from this Bill, what would you suggest then? That the HR person, or whoever in the Department, be working with DAGS? But that's like a lot of departments involved with DAGS.

Usually, I would think it would probably be the ASO, from the Department that would—they're usually the ones that handle space and facility issues, rather than the HR person. So, that would probably be the logical point of contact for DAGS.

Okay. No, I guess I'll call up DAGS. We'd like this to work. So, I'm just wondering how you would suggest this working. It's really space problems—not space problems, but space allocation, as well as work and whether work can be done remotely.

Yeah. I think our biggest challenge with this measure is just, the DAGS did not want to be the one determining whether or not an employee should be telework eligible. Right? We believe that that responsibility is—well, in our testimony, we put that with DHRD because it is an HR-related responsibility.

It is not a DAGS statutory responsibility. However, once that eligibility has been established, we certainly would be part of that process, of determining whether or not space could be reconfigured and adjusted appropriately, applying more modern standards for that type of telework environment.

So, how would you suggest this Bill be amended so that we do look at space allocation? It was one of the—when I was in GABO previously, we were looking at space allocation and bringing people back into state government offices and not have to lease so much space outside of government.

But how would that work, so that we're getting at, at the actual purpose for this? If you're going to telework, then you must be reducing space?

Yeah, I mean, I would say that perhaps adding some of that language into 4014, that would mandate that if a department were to have and utilize a telework regime within their operation, that they be mandated to, you know, go through a space analysis and reallocation of an adjustment to that space.

So, I could get you more specific language perhaps.

Don't management analysts do that?

Yeah, I mean. Well, actually, our public works division has a planning branch, who works directly with the departments on analyzing sort of like space allocation.

So, we don't need anything prescriptive like that in the building. That's something that can be carried out knowing the intent, right?

So, I guess we're saying that you will work with the Department.

We can and we do now, as it is. But there's no requirement, right, that they go through that process, specifically for telework. But again, I think our biggest concern was we just didn't want to be the department saying, oh, yes, you're eligible for telework, when that's really just not in our—that's not our Kuleana.

So, it's not the telework eligibility. It's once you decide to do teleworking, they should work with DAGS to look at space.

Exactly. Yep. Yep. Yep.

Any other questions? If not, I'm going to turn it over to my—oh, you do have a question. Okay. Hold tight, brother. Okay, with that, I'm going to turn it over to my illustrious Co-Chair to carry on the rest of this agenda. Take it away, sir.

Alright, thanks, Chair. Moving on to Senate Bill 1057 related to procurement. This clarifies that the bid incentive given to bidders for public works construction projects or parties to an apprenticeship agreement is based on apprenticeable trades utilized rather than employed to construct the public works. Okay. Up first we have Comptroller.

Chairs, Members, Keith Regan, Comptroller for the Commonwealth County General Services. We stand on our written testimony in support of this measure. Happy to answer any questions.

Okay, thank you very much, Comptroller. Up next we have State Procurement Office.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chairs, and Members of the committee. [inaudible] And we stand on our written testimony in support.

Okay, thank you very much. IBEW Local 1260.

Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members. On behalf of IBEW 1260. Stand on our support. We'd like to however stand- stand on- [inaudible].

Okay, thank you very much. Okay, up next we have General Contractors Association of Hawaii. Okay, in opposition. Okay. Good Fellow Brothers LLC.

Aloha Chairs and Members. Chris Delaunay with Strategies 360. We are here replying to Good Fellow Brothers, standing on our testimony in support.

Okay, thank you very much. And then we have IBEW 1186.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of committee we stand on our written testimony in support.

Okay, thank you very much. Any others wishing to testify?

Yeah. So.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Emmanuel Zibakalam, on behalf of the Plumbers and Fitters Local 657, we'd like to stand in strong support of this measure that clarifies the bid incentive given to bidders for public works construction projects.

We believe that this measure clarifies a long standing misapplication of policies intended to promote the usable of apprenticeship- apprenticeable trade programs. And here to answer any questions if needed.

Okay, thank you very much. Any others wishing to testify? Okay, seeing none. Members, questions? Okay, seeing no questions, I think we're gonna continue on. Okay. Senate Bill 1065 relating to skills based hiring. Okay.

Prohibits the state or any of its departments, agencies or political subdivisions from requiring a bachelor's degree as a condition of eligibility for hire to position in state employment. Establishes exemptions. Okay. Up first we have Comptroller.

Chairs, members of the committee, Keith Regan, Comptroller Department of County General Services. We stand on our testimony support. Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much, Comptroller. Up next we have Director D. Herd. Okay, thank you very much. We have budget and Finance Director. Okay. Clue Salivaria providing comments. Okay, up next we have Grassroot Institute of Hawaii and support. Okay. B. Smith and Jacob Weinscheck both in support. Victor Ramos in support. Any others wishing to testify? Senate Bill 1065.

Seeing non members questions. Okay, seeing none. Are we going to recess? We go straight into decision making. Sure.

Go straight in decision making, if you like.

Okay, we're going to recess for quorum.

All right, welcome back everybody. With your indulgence, we're going to go right into decision making for the joint committees. Heard several measures. First up, we had Senate Bill 444. It's a good discussion that reveals some very issues that need to be resolved.

However, in order to resolve them would take a lot of time and given there was no testimony in support, and only 1 in comment, after discussing it with my co-chair, we both agree concurrently that it's best we let this measure go for this year and work on it during the interim to address the very real issues that are behind this Bill.

So with that, the recommendation is that we defer this measure indefinitely. Okay with you too?

Yes.

Okay. All right, same recommendation by LBT. Next up, Senate Bill 1091. Recommendation on this one will be a Senate Draft 1. We're going to remove reference to OET.

As was noted, they are no longer their own division, but under the Comptroller. We're going to add a new section to the measure to add a management analyst position for the Administrative Services Office of DAGS. We're going to go ahead and we're going to.

In order to harmonize the preamble and the intent with the Bill, we're going to take the word positions which is in the measure and replace that with allocations.

We're also going to specify in the measure that the assessment is only applicable to Executive Branch departments and agencies that occupy DAGS management facilities or are in non-state facilities that are leased through DAGS. We'll note there already is a consult provision with DHRD in the Bill.

And to address these changes as well as any further issues, we're going to add a defective date of July 1st, 2491 to the measure. Members questions or comments on the recommendation? If Not, Senate Bill 1091, Senate Draft 1, I vote yes.

Okay. For SB 1091, Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair votes aye. Senator Gabbard is excused. Senator Moriwaki?

Aye.

I vote, aye. Senator Fevella?

Chair recommendation has been adopted.

Aye.

Mucho gracias.

Okay, thank you very much. Senate Bill 1091. Same recommendations. Any questions or concerns? Senator Moriwaki for the vote.

All Members present as. Chair Aquino?

Aye.

Senator Fevella.

Aye.

Recommendation passes.

Thank you very much. Moving on to Senate Bill 1057 relating to procurement. Members, the recommendation is to move this as a Senate Draft 1. We'll be adding some technical amendments and a defective date of July 1st, 2050. Questions or concerns, colleagues? Seeing none. Senator Moriwaki for the vote.

Senate Bill 1057. You said passed with amendments?

Amendment, yes.

Chair Aquino?

Aye.

Senator Lee is excused. Senator Ihara excused. Moriwaki, aye. Fevella? Senator Fevella?

Aye.

Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you.

Thank you much. Committee on Government Operations. Same recommendation. I vote yes.

Okay. With the, excuse, with Mike Gabbard being excused, are there any reservations? Are there any no's? Seeing none. Vice Chair, your recommendation has been adopted.

Okay, thank you very much. Moving on to Senate Bill 1065 relating to skills-based hiring. Colleagues, the recommendation is to move this as a Senate Draft 1. With some technical non-substantive amendments for clarity and consistency and the defective date of July 1st, 2050. Questions or concerns, colleagues? Seeing none. Senator Moriwaki.

Senate Bill 1065 passed with amendments. All members present. And we've got no reservations. Recommendation adopted.

Okay. Committee on Government Operations. Same Recommendation. Senate Draft 1. I vote yes.

Okay. I need a pen. My pen just died. Sorry. Okay. Voting on SB 1065, Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. With excused absence of Senator Gabbard. Are there any reservations? Are there any no's? Seeing none. Vice Chair recommendations has been adopted.

Okay, this concludes our Joint Committee hearing. Thank you.

Aloha everybody. Welcome back to the decision making for 3:00pm. These are the reconvenes for the measures that we heard earlier on Thursday, February - sorry, Tuesday, February 6th, - sorry, Tuesday, February 4th In this room. First up we had Senate Bill 92. This was relating to emergency medical response for defibs.

Given the testimony and everything and further conversations. We're going to defer this indefinitely as there essentially is already a pilot that has been going forward in the Capitol building. And we want to take the information that has been collected from this and working with DAGS, move this forward for other state buildings. And so this is clearly a summer project.

Okay, next up, Senate Bill 1175. This is past performance database relating to procurement. What we're going to do in this measure is we're going to take this Procurement Offices or office's amendments.

We're going to add in an appropriation from general funds in the Committee report because this will be blanked out of 13,500 for the state's past performance database, plus a one-time funding of $30,000.

We'll also note in the Committee report that this should, according to the SBO, encompass all anticipated activities, therefore, not having enough funds to carry this work out, and a defective date of 2491 for further conversations. Members, questions, comments? If not. 1175, Senate Draft 1. I vote yes.

Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair votes aye, Vice Chair votes aye. Senator Moriwaki?

Aye.

Senator San Buenaventura.

Aye.

Senator Fevella.

Measure passes.

Aye.

Thank you very much. Senate Bill 1587 relating to retinage, retainage. A few changes if you could just bear with me.

Recommendation is a Senate Draft 1. We're going to amend the Bill to add the term "total project budget" in 103.32.1C, which will be defined as a contract amount which may be increased or decreased through contract amendments and supplementary contracts.

We're going to amend Section 1, page 1, lines 4 through 16 to read as follows. "Any public contract may include a provision for the retainage of a portion of the total contract amount from the amount due under the contract to the contractor to ensure that the proper performance of the contract provided that: 1 the sum withheld by the procurement officer from the contractor shall not exceed" and we're leaving this blank still "blank percent of the total contract amount."

We're also going to go ahead and delete language from the comma on line 10 through the comma on line 13. We'll also delete the phrase "sums not exceeding" from on lines 14 and 15. And we're going to still keep the number of days, calendar days to still be blank.

There were concerns over both the percentage and the calendar days. We want to have the next committees look at that further.

And so we'll also go ahead along those lines is we're going to on page two, line seven, we're going to amend to read "contract including any contract amendment or supplementary contract is completed and satisfactory, provided that" amend page 2, line 10 to read "satisfactory and all contractor warranty periods have been completed" to reflect the concerns of the testimony.

And we're going to clarify that new statutory provisions are intended to apply only to contracts executed after January 1, 2026, again to address concerns in testimony and finally with all of that a defective date of 2491. Members, questions, comments? If not, 1587 Senate Draft 1, I vote yes.

For the Members present are there any no votes or reservations? Hearing none, the measure's adopted.

Okay. Next measure, 1543 relating to government accountability.

What we're going to do in this one here is we're going to adopt the amendments suggested by the state procurement officer in amending 103D-205 and by we're going to add on there a section or number eight which will say "ensure that the inherent government functions are not delegated to a contractor." And a defective date of 2491 for further conversations on these changes. Members, questions, comments? If not, Senate Draft 1, I vote yes.

On SB 1543 to pass with amendments. To the Members present, any no votes or reservations? Hearing none, the measure passes.

Okay, next one. Senate Bill 1255 relating to government records. Like to move this on as a Senate Draft 1. Like to recommend we delete sections 2, 3, and 4 and adopt the amendments to chapter 92F instead.

We're going ahead and add and amend the Chapter 92F definitions consistent with the definitions proposed at page 4, lines 10 through 18 to clarify that records used in the performance of a government function are government records subject to UIPA.

We're going to add a new section to 92F consistent with the obligations proposed at page 2, lines 5 through 15 to provide record keeping and access requirements for contractors performing a government function.

Add a new subsection to section 92F-11 so we're consistent with page three, lines 11 through 14 to clarify the protective proprietary information of a government contract is not subject to disclosure under UIPA. And finally we're going to go ahead and add an effective date of 2491. Members, questions, comments? if not, 1255 Senate Draft 1, I vote yes.

Members present, are there any no votes or reservations? Hearing none, the measure's adopted.

Okay, thank you. Senate Bill 1513 relating to appropriations. We want to do some more work on this Bill so with the Committee Members' indulgence we'd like to defer time certain to Tuesday, February 11th at 3pm in this room, 225.

Okay. Senate Bill 1616 we're going to go ahead relating to care centers.

We're going to instead, as we've discussed in this Bill, we're going to amend it as a Senate Draft 1to create a feasibility study that shall include but not be limited to the various factors that were laid out in the testimony by the end of, and the question by the Department of County and General Services. And of course a defective date of 2491. Members, questions, comments? If not Vice Chair, 1616 Senate Draft 1, I vote yes.

The Members present, are there any no votes or reservations? Hearing none, the measure's adopted.

Okay, thank you very much. Next up, Senate Bill 74 relating to state construction projects. Given the testimony of how this could inadvertently slow down and increase the cost of projects, we're going- and that the second part of the Bill was already in another Bill that was heard and amended and passed, we're going to defer this measure indefinitely for this year.

Next up, Senate Bill 1205 relating to state organizations and administrations. Recommendation is a Senate Draft 1 and what we're going to do is codify the HAR, the Hawaii Administrative Directive number 1902, into the statute which would also include when to report back to the legislatures. Yes?

It was brought up that the title might be...

We'll go ahead and let Ways and Means take a look at that. We can't change the title. So either dies right now. If you want, we can pull it and defer it or we can send it on and have it looked up by the Next Committee. Your call.

But I think that it's a good deal.

Do you want us to defer? Your call. Going once?

No, just pass it on.

Okay. That's what I thought. All right. We're codifying a HAR 19-02 which doesn't calculate the reporting requirements needed there.

We will note in the Committee report, however, there is a potential title problem with the Bill and have although this is only going to WAM, they can at least have a discussion for the chair's prerogative having a Bill in front of them whether or not it can be salvaged. Okay. Okay with that. Senate Draft 1. I vote yes.

On SB 1205 to pass with amendments. Members present, any no votes or reservations? Hearing none the measures adopted.

Okay, thank you very much. Senate Bill 786 related government records. Given the testimony on this measure, especially from our friend there from Florida, we're going to defer time certain to Tuesday, February 11th at 3pm in this room, 225, to work on amendments for the measurement.

Next up, Senate Bill 1611 relating to government positions. The recommendation on this is a Senate Draft One and we're going to remove section two from the measure. Members, questions, comments? If not Vice Chair, Senate Draft 1. I vote yes.

Members present, are there any no votes or reservations? Hearing none, the measure is adopted.

Okay, thank you very much on Senate Bill 1637. With all due respect to my good friend, the author of this measure, the ombudsman in his testimony said that they can already do this. So his concurrence we're going to defer this one for this year.

However, we want to work with him on ensuring that the ombudsman, if he has his power, does take this up. Everybody good? Everybody good with the deferral?

Okay, next up, Senate Bill 1651 relating to public meetings. Recommendation on this is given the testimony and the use of the word "full" to try to ameliorate these concerns. We're going to go ahead and change the distribution of packets from two to three days and we're going to remove the word "full" throughout the Bill and the reason for the two to three will make sense here.

We're going to insert page two, lines five through six. We're going to replace with the following "Members, but no later than 7:45am on the third business day before the meeting, the board shall also make the board packet..."

On page two lines 13-15 we're going to replace with the following "at the time the board packet is made available for public inspection in the board's office, the notice shall include a list of the..." which is existing language in there. And and defective date of 2491 so the next Committee can further explore these changes.

But we believe this will address the concerns that were brought up by the use of the word full. Members, questions, comments? If not, Vice Chair, 1651 Senate Draft 1, I vote yes.

Of the Members present, noting the absence of Senator Fevella, any noes or reservations? Hearing none, the measure passes.

Okay, 1617 relating to public meetings. We appreciate the intent of this Bill. However Office of Information Practices, you remember at the hearing they said they haven't gotten any complaints at all about this so we're going to defer this. Hopefully that can be worked on over the summer of the issues if we're behind this Bill, the furthest in one indefinitely.

Next up Senate Bill 1253 relating to boards and commissions. On this measure here we didn't receive any testimony at all on the measure and so we're going to have to defer this indefinitely as we did not receive any supporting testimony at all.

Next up, Senate Bill 1031 relating to advisory referendum. Given the testimony on this I'd like to work on some possible amendments to hear the concerns and possibly advance for further conversation. So with that defer time certain Tuesday, February 11th at 3:00pm in room 225.

And finally Senate Bill 1306 relating to Procurement Automation Special Fund. This one basically would align section 103D 203B HRS with the section 302A 1702 and add is Executive Director of the School Facilities Authority as a Chief Procurement Officer.

We're going to go ahead and add a defective date of 2491 to ensure that there's no other issues outstanding and move it along to Ways and Means for their consideration. Members, questions, comments? If not Vice Chair, 1306 Senate Draft One, I vote yes.

Members president are there any no votes or reservations? Hearing none the measures adopted. Okay thank you everybody. Appreciate your aloha.