Senate Standing Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts

Great afternoon, everyone.

Will the joint committees on public safety and military affairs and transportation and culture and arts please come to order. Today is Wednesday, February 5th, 2025. This is our 3:00pm hearing in Conference Room 225. We have a few housekeeping announcements to be made. This hearing is also being streamed on our Hawaii State Senate's YouTube channel.

In the unlikely case of technical failures, this meeting will reconvene here in Conference Room 225 at 3pm on February 7th. For all testifiers, including those on zoom, we ask that you stand on your written testimony. If your oral testimony is different from your written testimony, the time limit for each testifier will be one minute.

The content, including the hearing notice, copies of the bills and testimony can be found on the Legislature's website. If time permits, decision making will occur after we hear from those offering testimony. And now I'd like to defer to Co-Chair Lee.

Bless you. Thank you very much. Up first, this afternoon is Senate Bill 1226 relating to fireworks, which establishes the shipping container inspection program and requires DLE Department of law enforcement to submit reports. Testifying first on 1226 is the Department of Law Enforcement. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Good afternoon Chairs, Members of the Committee, so I am Mike Lambert. I am the Director nominee for the Department of Law enforcement and we go ahead and support this test of this initiative. And I'm here to answer any questions. Thank you.

Up next is the Attorney General.

Good afternoon. Chairs Elefante and Lee and vice chairs Inouye and Wakai. Members of the Committee, we do offer comments on this Bill. We note one problem.

The notation where the DLE is expected to also inspect for explosives in addition to fireworks that might cause a problem might be seen as violating Article 3, Section 14 of the Hawaii State Constitution, which says that each law shall embrace but one subject who shall be expressed in its title.

So we would recommend deleting the words "and explosives" from page four, lines three and 19 of the Bill. We also note that there is an act called the Posse Comitatus act, which restricts the use of federal military personnel in domestic law enforcement activities that might limit the use of the US Military.

As part of this group with-

It seems like that might not be around much longer, we'll see.

Yeah, we'll see. You never know what what will happen. Thank you for the opportunity to pose this comment.

Thank you. Testifying next is Hawaiian Humane Society in support.u Abra Green in opposition. Hawaii Harbor Users group. Good afternoon.

Aloha. Melissa Pavlicek on behalf of the Hawaii Harbors Users Group. We appreciate the intent of this measure and just felt it was important to explain that our concerns were primarily regarding logistics delays and the cost of implementing. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Sorry. Do you have some amendments you guys wanted to make?

Okay, questions and then we can dive in. Retail merchants of Hawaii. IT, are they with us on Zoom?

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

Okay, thank you. We have testimony and support from 18 individuals in support and two in opposition. Is there anyone else in the room with us wishing to testify in this measure this afternoon? Oh, please come forward.

Hi, my name is Ernest Robello. I'm a lieutenant with the Narcotics Rights Division of the Honolulu's State of Hawaii. the Honolulu Police Department supports this Bill.

Thank you very much. Anyone else on this measure? All right. If not other questions? Yes, Vice Chair.

Senator Melissa.

Yeah, I understand you folks had quite a bit of amendments to be made. Could you send it in?

We have not proposed amendments at this time, but if this should move forward, if we would have an opportunity to suggest them in the future, we raise concerns primarily about the mechanics of the inspections and where they occur, how they occur and the random nature of the inspections.

Thank you. A reason I ask is, Melissa is representing the Hubber users, the hugs group, but I think Matson has some changes and amendments to the measure. So Chair, if you don't mind, can I submit it to you then on behalf of Manson if they're not here?

Sure. Why don't we wait till.

Okay. All right. Just to let you know that because they're, they're actually at the harbor and the hugs group is part of the organization, but I think the harbors, I think who's in control I think is very concerning. And so I think we should look at their amendments as well and share. Okay, thank you so much.

Anybody else?

Senator Wakai, TLE, Director Lambert. So the Bill says the inspections are going to be done by dogs. Correct. And from what I understand, when people do ship illegal fireworks in here, they might put it in a container and they'll have like furniture or whatever in the front, and then the fireworks is stuck in the back.

So when you bring the dog there, you probably would have to like unload most of the stuff to make sure that the dog can sniff all the way in the back of the container. Correct. Which would take a lot of time and manpower just to offload and then put all the stuff back into the convert.

Yes. Depending on where it is stored and the integrity of the container, the dog could possibly hit from the outside. But definitely with the doors open, the dog should be able to detect.

Oh, okay. So once you open the door, even if there's all kinds of other legit stuff in the front, he'll be able to smell the contraband in the very back of the container?

It's possible. So it's kind of, it's hard to say for sure because it's how they pack it and how it's there, but it's possible for the dog to hit from even outside the container.

Oh, okay.

Thank you.

Any further questions?

I guess for homes, I was aware when I introduced the Bill, I was aware that there was, I mean, all our cargo basically comes through Honolulu Harbor, so there's, it says incoming shipping containers to a great extent. Reasonable extent reasonable. On a designated secure site, logistically necessary, Located commercial harbor.

Why does that not take care of the problem?

I guess that just wanting a lack, wanting to understand the clarity of what that would mean and where, you know, where the, where the inspections would take place.

Okay. I mean. I mean, I can understand why you'd want to know where, but I mean, it, we've certainly planned for that in the Bill so that it's, i get it, there's a whole bunch of stuff coming through there, but if they can take it somewhere else, then it seems like it should be okay.

I think it's the volume and logistics, Senator. And if we could share any other additional concerns, I would be glad to follow up with you.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Yeah. Question for Director Lambert. Thank you. Director, who would you think would be the point agency if this Bill were to pass in terms of coordinating, you know, with dot, with the harbor groups, shipping containers, HPD Feds? Has that been thought out by DLE?

Sure. So, we would have to take the point as we are this, we want to become the lead state agency for this type of initiative, so we would be the ones responsible for coordinating with our county and federal partners. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair. Any further questions? If not, all right. Thank you. Why don't I turn it over to PSM?

Okay. Thank you, Chair Lee. Next up on our agenda is SB 302, relating to fireworks. This amends the culture--the definition of cultural, prohibits the use of consumer fireworks except for culture use by permit, repeals the wording of Section 132D-3, Subsection 1, HRS, that generally allows the use of consumer fireworks without a permit on New Year's Eve, New Year's Day, and the Fourth of July.

Makes it unlawful to offer display for sale, sell, or furnish consumer fireworks to any person except for a cultural use by permit, prohibits the sale of fireworks to a person more than five calendar days before a permitted cultural use, imposes a fee of $25 per permit for the purchase and culture use of consumer fireworks, and imposes a statewide limitation on consumer fireworks except by permit for cultural use. First up on our agenda is the Chair of the Hawaii State Fire Council, Chief Kazuo Todd or Mr. Lum.

Yes. Good afternoon, Chair Elefante, Chair Lee, and members of the committees. Gary Lum, testifying on behalf of the State Fire Council, and you have our written testimony that was submitted and we do recognize right now a large focus is on illegal aerial fireworks in the hands of the public.

But we do also feel that consumer fireworks, or firecrackers, as they're known, continue to be ignition sources for both building fires and wildland fires and sources of injury for the public and distress for those that do have respiratory illnesses, and we do realize there may be some problematic language in the bill, but we're willing to work with the ledge as the bill moves through the process. I'll be available for questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much, Mr. Lum. Ernesto Sonny Ganaden, testifying for the Office of the Public Defender. Aloha. Welcome.

Chair Elefante, Chair Lee, Sonny Ganaden, Deputy Public Defender. The Office of the Public Defender opposes this bill because of the use of the term culture as defined, of course, in the state constitution and in the Hawaii Revised Statutes. Culture here--

If you can speak closer to the mic? Sorry.

It's so intimate here.

Welcome to the Senate.

Yeah. Got to go right up to you. All right. Culture in Hawaii is specifically defined, and it's specifically defined for native Hawaiians. So in our testimony, we discussed the 1998 State vs Hanapi case and several other cases which define culture. In the bill, if it were to pass, basically the person issuing the permit would be the person defining culture. We find that to be problematic, and possibly somebody who is denied a permit could argue that their civil rights were violated for discrimination purposes. So for that reason, we respectfully oppose.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Ganaden. Stephanie Kendrick, in support from Humane Society. Marianne Hussenbucks, in support. In opposition, Tina Yamaki on Zoom.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

Okay, thank you. IT, Tad Trout on Zoom. IT, do we have Tad Trout on Zoom?

He's present on Zoom, Chair.

Mr. Trout, are you with us?

How about now? Can you hear me now?

Yes, we can hear you. Please proceed.

I have a minute? Thank you. Good afternoon, Honorable Chairs, Vice Chairs, and committee members. My name is Tad Trout. I'm a partner at TNT Fireworks, and we oppose SB 302. I have submitted written detailed testimony as to why we are opposed, but I'd like to add a few more comments.

SB 302 is attempting to address the tragic accident that had happened on Oahu this past New Year season. While noble, the reality of the results will have unintended consequences. SB 302 would require permit to purchase state-approved consumer fireworks only on cultural events.

State-approved consumer fireworks are being sold on the other islands through major retailers such as Walmart, Longs Drugs, Don Quijote, and Costco. The other islands are not experiencing these tragic events that occurred on Oahu because the residents have a safer product readily available to them without purchasing a permit. This requirement would, however, drive the consumer to purchase illegal fireworks and explosives since they would be much easier to obtain.

Thank you, Mr. Trout. Next up is Daniel Peart from Phantom Fireworks. And in our--next testifiers just submitted written testimony is Abbra Green, testifying for Libertarian Party of Hawaii, in opposition. Comments from Beverly Heiser.

And the following people are in support are Mary Kawasaki, Scott Sumi, Joanna Alilo, Lois Krauser, Lynn Matasal, Stephanie McLaughlin, Janice Fukuda, Melanie Kim, Serena Stefanic-Phillip, Jennifer Chiwa, Bill Dixon, Sherri Iha, Jamie Takane, Gordon B. Lindsay, all in support. And in opposition: Michael A. Cobb Jr., Bronson Teixeira, and Nicholas Zaire. Anyone else that wishes to testify?

Oh, yes. Anyone else that wishes to testify on SB 302? And just to note for the record, Daniel Peart from Phantom Fireworks in opposition. Okay, members, any questions?

I have a question for--

Yes, Vice Chair Inouye.

Yes, thank you. And I guess this is the Fire Council's Bill, I guess, but there's a reference that it also talks about imposing the $25. Is this a new fee, because right now to get a permit isn't the cost $25 that a consumer pays? Presently?

I believe only Honolulu County has that requirement. Yes. Yeah, that's correct. So we like the permit requirements to go statewide and we feel that allowing cultural events such as the Lion Dance, where it's very controlled and the firecrackers do not get into the hands of children or juveniles, would go a long way towards improving public safety.

Okay. So those events, it's already an organization, but you know that they're buying--whose fireworks are they using in those kinds of activities?

I believe those organizations are purchasing the firecrackers themselves.

So in other words, the county is already charged $25 to get a permit. We're saying that if you're in control, you're going to charge another $25? No? Because why would it be in the bill then?

I believe that fee is for the time and effort to process permanent applications by all the counties.

Okay. Thank you anyway.

Any other questions for Mr. Lum? I have a question for you, Mr. Lum. Would the Fire Council be open to a cap on the amount of permits?

Sure. Anything to reduce the amount of firecrackers in the hands of the public--

Cause right now it can be unlimited amount of permits.

That's correct. In Honolulu this past New Year's Eve, an individual came in and bought about 1,000 permits, which allows him to purchase approximately five million firecrackers. So that in itself presents a hazard as to where is he storing this amount of explosives. Is it in a residential area? That presents as much hazard as the Aliamanu fireworks explosion.

Thank you. Members, any other further follow-up questions for Chief Lum? If not, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And then our final item on our joint agenda is SB 1324. This is relating to fireworks. This amends multiple definitions and penalties for fireworks offenses, including heightened penalties if another person suffers substantial bodily injury, serious bodily injury or death as a result of the fireworks offenses.

Establishes criminal offenses of General fireworks or articles pyrotechnic prohibitions in the first and second degrees, sending or receiving fireworks or articles of pyrotechnic by air delivery distributing fireworks articles pyrotechnic to non permit holder removal or extraction of pyrotechnic contents, consumer fireworks provision prohibitions, refusal to provide identification and violating requirements of carrier.

Establishes an adjudication system procedures to process fireworks infractions and mix an appropriation. First on our list is Deputy Attorney General Tricia Nakamatsu.

Good afternoon Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of both committees. Deputy Attorney General Tricia Nakamatsu appearing on behalf of the Department of the Attorney General. The Department strongly supports this Bill and we thank you for hearing it. Chairs. We do offer one suggestion which is to add another offense. And that's detailed at the very end of our testimony.

And listening to that description now, the Bill certainly does quite a lot, but really the overarching goal of this Bill is to give our law enforcement agencies and prosecutors the tools they need to enforce Hawaii's fireworks control laws, to hold offenders accountable and to hopefully deter people from making these bad choices in the first place.

Just quick highlights, as noted, the Bill does establish enhanced penalties, which would apply to most offenses in the Bill and that means that if anybody is either a repeat offender or if the listed fireworks involved results in someone suffering substantial bodily injury, serious bodily injury, or death, that penalties would go up.

And that applies to everyone from the importers, to the sellers, the purchasers, the person who sets it off, everyone.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And if you don't mind staying around in case there's some further follow up questions. Thank you. Mr. Ernesto Sonny Ganaden.

Afternoon again Chair, Vice Chair, Sonny Ganaden, Deputy Public Defender. The Office of the Public Defender opposes this measure. We are in support of the various other bills, SB222, SB227, for example, creating an illegal fireworks Enforcement Division. In our lengthy testimony, we discussed how we believe this proposed measure is unconstitutional.

It creates both a civil and a criminal trial calendar in the same course of conduct. And we just believe that is, frankly, unconstitutional. As you know, in the criminal cases you're going to be offered a public defender if you are an indigent client, like many people of Hawaii are.

And in the civil cases you are not, however, arising from the same facts and circumstances and is going to create a real problem, likely be unconstitutional. We believe that you should separate them, defer this measure and cut them apart for next year. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ganaden. Andrew H. Martin, prosecuting Attorney for Maui County. In support, Jerome Pokaro, Captain Narco Vice HPD.

Good afternoon Chairs, Vice chairs, Committee Members. I'm Lieutenant Ernest Robello with the Narcotics Vice Division. I'm here on behalf of Captain Jerome Pokaro. The Honolulu Police Department supports this Bill and I stand on the written testimony that we submitted. I'll be available for questions if there are any.

Great, thank you. Thank you. Stephanie Kendrick for Hawaiian Humane Society, in support. Lisa Dow, Keiki Injury Prevention Coalition, in support. In opposition, Abra Green, Bruce Albrecht, and then the rest following are in oh, in opposition, I have Austin Shiloh Martin on Zoom, Libertarian Party of Hawaii.

Aloha, everyone. Thank you for hearing me today. This entire concept of trying to use prohibition is a mistake. When has it ever worked? The problem with prohibition is that it takes law enforcement's attention away from criminal behaviors and actual criminals, and instead places it on objects.

Innocent people who have done nothing wrong, nothing criminal, will find themselves with a permanent record and charges for something that has always been acceptable. Well, what happened this year is tragic. It's clearly being exploited by the Executive for maximum political gain to pressure this body to commit constitutional violations in its actions.

And I would urge you not to do so. I stand on my written testimony and I would supplement it with these remarks. We're talking about a very serious crackdown that will go way beyond just fireworks. The resources. This is throwing good money after bad guys. We need the bad guys to go to jail.

We need our laws to be upheld. We do not need to criminalize innocent people to accomplish that.

Thank you so much.

Aloha.

Aloha. And then the other two people in opposition is Branchen Teixeira and Nicholas Zaire. And then we have the following folks in support. Scott Suomi, Joanna P. Milo, Lois Krauser, Lynn Matasau, Stephanie Mclaughlin, Marianne Husenbucks, Janice Fukuda, Melanie Kim, Serena Stefanik, Phillip Jennifer, Chiwa, Aime Takane, Sherry Iha, Gordon B.

Lindsey, Bill Dixon and Beverly Heiser, all in support. Is there anyone else that wishes to testify on SB 1324? Yes. Please come forward and if you could state your name for the record.

Aloha, everyone. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Z. Everyone in Members, thank you so much. My name is Joshua Dujalansa and this is my colleague, Stephanie Pasquale. We represent Hawaii Explosives and Pyrotechnic. We are a local 30 year pyrotechnic business and we do things legally. You might have seen our work in Waikiki.

You might have seen our stuff out for New Year's, all the legal stuff. Although we do support everything that our policemen are doing, our firefighters are doing. The way that this Bill is written, it excludes what we do. It excludes our fireworks shows, it excludes licensed commercial display companies such as ours.

And it's really, really important for us. Some of these things like, you know, not being able to launch from the beach or being within 500ft, that would just kill our business. And so we would like an amendment or maybe just some conversations around being introduced to 132D-6. There's exceptions. We talk about the movies, television productions, theater.

Thank you. But not us yet. Thank you. Thank you. Would you like to offer any comments?

Stephanie Pasquale, CEO of Hawaii Explosives and Pyrotechnics. I'm just here for any questions you guys may have.

Okay.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Director Lambert, I did see. Did you want to come up and testify?

Chairs, Members of the Committee. I do apologize we weren't able to get our testimony in time, but I do want to make myself available for questions. We are in support.

We do have some small comments that we'd like for you to consider, which is to remove things that have milligram amounts because that makes it very difficult when our scientific laboratories have to aggregate that weight for smaller offenses. So just, and again, I'll be available for questions. Okay, thank you.

I apologize. I did. Ms. Natalie Graham Wood in support anyone else that wishes to testify on SB 1324 Members. Questions?

Question?

Yes, Senator DeCorte.

Thank you, sir. Do we have anybody from the prosecuting attorney's office here? I know I saw testimony from the Maui, but anybody from prosecuting office, if not, I guess Attorney General. Thank you. Since Department of Law Enforcement formed their illegal fireworks task force, there has been been some offenses, some arrests that have been made, about 50.

There have been very little convictions, couple misdemeanors, those kinds of things. How do you project that the prosecuting office or that we can actually hold these penalties, hold these people accountable with actual convictions?

Because I see that Department of Law Enforcement is doing their part and I know you're on behalf of the Attorney General, but maybe you can kind of try to help to understand that where does it fall between the cracks when it comes to the prosecuting part of it, the conviction part of it.

So what this Bill does, it actually goes throughout the entire chapter, including the definitions. And all the definitions aren't very exciting. Perhaps at times.

Talk about that is one of the most fundamental changes that this Bill does in places where currently it's very difficult, as was previously mentioned by Director Lambert, to prove certain definitions that are currently based off of weight, currently based off of how much gunpowder is in a particular fireworks, particularly a problem if the fireworks has already gone up in the air and exploded.

Sometimes there's no evidence to collect. There's no way to prove sometimes that the thing was technically an aerial device, consumer firework or firework. And there's also the way it's currently defined requires possibly multiple expert witnesses to prove those definitions.

So, the way that the definitions are amended, the hope is that in some or most cases that the physical evidence would not have to be collected, expert witnesses would not have to be called, forensic testing would not have to be done.

Okay, very good. And then I do have a follow up question, I'm sorry, for Department of Law Enforcement, whenever. Thank you very much, Mike, for being with us. Department of Law Enforcement during our Ways and Means Committee had stated that they disposed of £140,000 of illegal fireworks which caused taxpayers $1.0 million.

Do you project that this will continue to cost taxpayers millions upon millions of dollars?

Yes, it's extremely expensive because in the amounts that it's seized, it's considered hazardous material. We have a vendor in the mainland that would charge us $1.0 million per container if we were to do it out of the State.

So it's going to be extremely expensive and I know it's not for this Bill, but something to consider where the Senate is to pass that along to the violators. So in other words, the cost of disposal should go to the person that brought it in. Just something to consider.

Because if you have a quarter $1.0 million to bring it in, then you maybe have a quarter $1.0 million to get rid of it.

Do you find that to be a realistic approach though, is to put that on the violators?

It's unrealistic in the sense of we would have to definitely look at scale. But when you're talking about the top tier distributors. Yes, they're making millions of dollars a year bringing it in. So again, it's just something that would have to go into further discussion and broken down further based on the weight of the distribution.

But as it sits right now, the cost does go to taxpayers, the tax does go to taxpayers and is extremely hefty. I think one of the things that I want to finish on is that the storage of it creates a huge hazardous risk to law enforcement and anybody else.

Okay.

I think we all remember the Waikele incident and I hate for that to be repeated under my watch, but with the inability to destroy quickly, I hate to say that the state is taking on quite a bit of liability.

Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, Chair.

You're welcome. Members, any further questions? If not, the chair does have questions for the AG and Department of Law Enforcement, you both can come up. Start with Deputy Attorney General Nakamatsu. So in this Bill, it mentions an appropriation. Where specifically are you asking for an appropriation?

Oh, that's, so in creating a new system of fireworks infractions that will actually require the court to handle these.

Oh, okay. So you're not asking for funding specifically in here, just General. You'll have to have appropriation down the road, correct?

I believe if the judiciary requires additional funding to redo their case management system, I'm not sure what exactly it is, but their system to process the citations, which are non traffic citations.

Okay, thank you. And then the other question I had is, you heard from Mr. De Valencia about their business and doing commercial type of fireworks professional shows. So in this proposal, would that eliminate doing those type of shows or is there provisions to exempt that type of commercial shows?

Well, we didn't talk to any stakeholders or legislators about any changes. However, my understanding of the law currently is that that part of the law wasn't actually changed. It's already illegal to do it within to set off fireworks within 500ft of a hotel from certain public areas. That's already in the law.

It was just the penalties that were amended and some of the structures, I believe hotels was expanded to dwellings.

Okay. And I'm looking at your, on the exceptions on page 45, 132d-6.

Yes.

So I don't know if I'm reading that section correctly, if they would be allowed to do that.

Right now I think it says movies, television, and theater primarily.

Yeah. So that if it falls within that category, then that would be allowed. Yes. Okay, thank you. And then for Director Lambert, I know we don't have written testimony from you, but you did mention some oral amendments. What was that specifically?

So it regards into anything that has to do with the milligrams, because when it's broken down, for example, when we receive £100, that's very easy. But in regards to the citations of someone that lets one off.

When you're going into milligrams, what is explained to me by the lab tech is that you actually have to dismantle it and then scrape, scrape what's in it and then weigh it. And that becomes labor intensive for something that broken down would probably just be a violation. Another is somebody just popping bottle rockets.

So it's just very cumbersome.

Could you, as written, could you enforce?

We could enforce and then there just would be, it just be labor intensive on the tech. So we support this Bill because the AGs wrote it. And the discussion that we had is that if it's written in this fashion, would you charge our cases? And the discussion was yes.

So based on that, you know, we're trusting legally that everything in this would stand up in court, and that's why we stand behind it.

Thank you. Any further questions, Members for the AG or DLE, if not Chair? I'm good, thank you. I'll have one question for Lieutenant Robello. So, maybe in your experience or on different watches, have you issued citations for fireworks violations?

I have in the past. That was many, many years. Close when I first started in the Department this March. I'll make 32 years in the Holland Police Department. I can tell you that going forward, though, I got promoted, became a detective.

Fireworks prosecutions or even enforcement is very difficult for many of the things that you heard from the AGs as well as the DLE. A lot of the stuff requires evidence. Much of evidence is destroyed in the process of breaking the law. And then definitions are killing us.

From what I'm being told by attorneys, prosecutors, public defenders, attorneys in private practice is, the definitions are very vague or they're too generic. And so what happens is when the burden of proof is on the state or the city, it becomes very challenging in court to proceed with prosecution of these cases.

So many of these cases, even though we take make an arrest, so we say we issue a citation, they get not a prostitute done by the prosecutor's office for various reasons. I'm being told majority of them are for the purposes of the definitions.

So, as the Director stated and as the AG attorney stated, changes definitions will help to streamline the process and will help to streamline the enforcement process.

We can do our part as far as making arrests, doing the citations, but what we're finding is challenging is trying to get these people prosecuted and actually charged with some type of crime so we can deter the behavior. Many now people are being cited or whatever.

If you're paying like a nominal fine or the charges are being dismissed, it's going back to other people who are saying, well, even if they catch you, they're not going to do anything to you. And so we need some kind of deterrence.

And we're hoping to change these definitions will allow us that deterrence by the fact that these charges will stick. There'll be some kind of punitive being done for these offenses.

Thank you Lieutenant Rebel Members. Any other questions for HPD or anyone else?

Okay. If not and I'll turn it back over to,

Co-Chair Lee, we're going to roll into decision.

Okay, thank you very much. Up first is Senate Bill 1226 relating to fireworks. This was the shipping container inspection program. I'd like to move this forward recommending we pass with amendments.

First, we want to address the DLE comments clarifying that inspection shall include risk based inspections pursuant to this Bill language, but in addition random inspections so the two are not in conflict. Secondly, adopt the Attorney General recommendations removing the term explosives.

We want to remove the 2025 program start date instead direct the program to begin as soon as is practical, but no later than July 1, 2027.

We'd like to task DLE and DOT with finding a secure site where container inspections can occur outside of the immediate port explosive arc such that it won't delay the moving of containers off ships, but still will enable inspections to happen as appropriate. Like to clarify that DLE shall retain responsibility for securing illegal goods that may be found.

Also that DLE employees and duty employees are going to be immune from liability in their personal capacity when acting in accordance with the law.

However, liability for damages to any container goods shall be borne by the state, accepting illegal commodities, and finally adding in a defective date so that this can move on to the Ways and Means Committee for further consideration. So any discussion on this?

Yes. Chair, why don't we change the wording that reflects shipping and include the word cargo containers, Because I think in all of this, yeah, it's shipping containers are different from cargo container inspections. Because actually what we'll be doing the inspections is on cargo. That's my opinion. Yeah. Since we've been doing with, dealing with. Yeah, that was in.

Sorry, that was one of the pieces of testimony as well. Yeah. So we can do that, make a note in the community report also that that stuff the case. Then you can take a look at the exact definition necessary.

Sure. Thank you.

Okay. Anyone else, if not Vice Chair for the vote.

Okay. Chair's recommendation on SB 1226 is to pass with amendments. And this is to the Committee of Transportation and Culture and the Arts. Pass with amendments. Chair Lee, Vice Chair. Senator Elefante, I. Senator Kanuha. Senator DeCorte, I. Measures adopted, Mr. Chair.

And same recommendation for the Committee on Public Safety and Military affairs with amendments. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair votes I.

I vote yes. Senator Fukunaga, I. Senator Rhoads, I. Senator DeCorte, I. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Thank you so much, Vice Chair. Moving on to our next item on our agenda, which is SB302. This is relating to fireworks. A recommendation here is to pass with amendments under Section 132D-10 permits for purchase and use of fireworks, page 8, line 13.

After the words per permit, we're going to add a cap, with a cap of no more than five permits per person, and then change the effective date to July 1, 2025 in any technical amendments. Any discussion if not for PSM, Vice Chair, Chair votes I with amendments.

Noting the presence of all members, any opposition or reservations to the Chair's, note for Senator DeCorte. Chair, Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. TCA Committee, same recommendation.

Chair's recommendation for the Committee and on transportation and Culture and the arts is to pass SB302 with amendments with five members present. Any voting, with reservation. Any no votes?

No.

Okay. Measures adopted. Mr. Chair

Chair, thank you. Thank you. And our last item on our Joint Hearing is SB 1324. This is relating to fireworks. A recommendation here is to pass with amendments.

We're going to adopt the recommendations made by the Attorney General in their testimony regarding the new section of HRS 132D-A, keep the effective date and make any technical amendments as necessary. Any further discussion on the recommendation. Okay, if not Vice Chair, Chair votes I. With amendments.

I vote yes. Senator Fukunaga, I. Senator Rhoads, I. Senator DeCorte, no. Chair, your recommendation is adopted. Thank you. TCA Committee, same recommendation.

Thank you. For the Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts, Chair's recommendation is to pass SB 1324 with amendments, with five Members present. Any voting with reservations. Any noes. No, measures adopted, Mr. Chair

This concludes our Joint Hearing. We're adjourned.

Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the Senate Committee on Public Safety and Military Affairs. It is the 3:15 agenda. Today is February 5, 2025, and we're in Conference Room 225. This hearing is also being streamed on the Hawaii State Senate YouTube channel.

A few Housekeeping. A Few Housekeeping announcements in the unlikely case of technical failures, this meeting will reconvene here in Conference Room 225 at 3pm on February 7th. For testifiers, including those on Zoom, we ask that you stand on your written testimony.

If your oral testimony is different from your written testimony, the time limit for each testifier will be one minute. The content, including the hearing notice and copies of the bills and testimony can be found on the Legislature's website if time permits.

Decision Making Worker after we hear from those offering testimony, and for those that have been waiting for this, I do apologize for a delayed start. We had a Joint Hearing at 3 o'clock that ran a little long, so with that we'll get right into it. Our first item on our agenda is SB227. This is relating to fireworks.

Establishes the Illegal Fireworks Enforcement Division within the Department of Law Enforcement, appropriates funds and sunsets on June 30, 2028. First, from the Department of Law Enforcement, Director Mike Lambert.

Good afternoon, Chair. Members of the Committee. We stand in strong support of this Bill and I am available for any questions.

Thank you so much. Abbra Green in opposition. Beverly Heiser in support. Victor Ramos in support. Alan Urasaki in support. Bronson Teixeira in opposition and Nicholas Zaire in opposition. Is there anyone else that wishes to testify on SB227. If not members questions. Move on to our next Item, which is SB476. This is relating to fireworks.

First, from the Department of Law Enforcement, Director Lambert.

Good afternoon, Chair. Members of the Committee, we stand in strong support and I'm available for questions.

Thank you so much. Captain Terence Gomez for the Maui Police Department on Zoom.

Good afternoon. Thank you for this opportunity to testify in support of SB476. I am Captain Terence Gomez of the Maui Police Department. I'm speaking on behalf of Police Chief John Pelletier, who has submitted written testimony. We recommend shifting the focus from stopping the supply of illegal explosives to reducing demand.

It involves multiple steps, all of which are crucial for its success. The definition of fireworks should be updated to classify illegal fireworks as illegal explosive ordinance. Using the term highlights the seriousness of the issue and should be the standard moving forward. The classification, which is currently a category C funding, needs to Change and be increased.

There must be a mandatory imposed jail time for the possession, no less than one year, and the mandatory fine of $10,000. Anyone caught transporting illegal explosive ordinance must face mandatory jail time. The vehicle which will be seized unless valued over $10,000, in which case a $10,000 fine will be imposed.

If an individual reports those that are in possession, they are entitled to 50% of the collected fines. Penalties for selling and distributing illegal explosive ordinance should be increased to match those of narcotics trafficking. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you, Captain, appreciate it. Next up is Jerome Pacarro, Captain for Narcotics/Vice, or Lieutenant Robello.

Hi. Good afternoon. Chairs, Vice Chair, Committee Members, again Lieutenant Ernest Robello. On behalf of Captain Drum Kakar of the Narcotics Vice Division. The Hollow Police Department supports this Bill. We have submitted testimony. I'm here for any questions. Okay. Available.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Lisa Dau testifying for Kiki Injury Prevention Coalition, in support. Abbra Green in opposition. Austin Shiloh Martin in opposition. On Zoom.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

Thank you IT. Former State Senator Willis Sparrow in support. Lynne Matusow in support. Gordon B. Lindsey in support. Beverly Heiser in support. Bronson Teixeira in opposition, and Nicholas Zaire in opposition. Is there anyone else that would like to testify in SB476?

If not, Members, questions? Move on to our final item on our agenda, which is SB 222, relating to fireworks. First up is Director Lambert.

Good afternoon, Chair, Members of the Committee. We stand in strong support of this measure. I'm available for questions.

Okay, thank you. Jerome Pacarro, Captain, Narco/Vice, or Lieutenant Robello.

Good afternoon again, Chairs, Vice Chairs, Committee Members. Again, Lieutenant Ernest Robello, Narcotics/Vice Division, on behalf of Captain Jerome Pacarro, the Narcotics Vice Division, Honolulu Police Department. The Honolulu Police Department supports this bill. We have submitted testimony. I will be available for if there are any questions.

Okay. Thank you, Lieutenant. We have Abbra Green, Libertarian Party of Hawaii, in opposition. Lynne Matusow in support. Gordon B. Lindsey in support. Beverly Heiser in support. Bronson Teixeira in opposition. Victor K. Ramos in opposition. Nicholas Zehr in opposition. Is there anyone else that wishes to testify in SB 222? Members, questions? Question for Director Lambert. So two of these bills deal with enforcement, SB 227 and SB 222. Do you feel you still need both the task force and the enforcement division even though you don't have an enforcement division now?

Yes, because the task force would allow us to partner and move resources to the counties. If it's only my enforcement unit, the funding would kind of be isolated to only the DLE.

Okay. And your task force unit, they not only focus on fireworks, they also do other investigations?

Yes. The hope would be that the Legislature would allow us to broaden it to firearms as well. Because although Aliamanu was terrible, we do have an increase in gun violence. So what I envision is that these investigators would be like a state level of the ATF. And that way, as the issues switch throughout the state, we have the latitude to move between fireworks and firearms.

Okay, thank you. Members, any questions for Director Lambert? Vice Chair Wakai.

I'm looking at the bill, and the appropriation is blanked out. Can you just give us an idea, like how much money would it cost for you to set up this operation?

In fact, I have my Finance Officer here. So it's going to be eight positions, and he'll go ahead and share those costs. And this would be for full time investigators to do fireworks and firearms.

Okay, thank you, Chair and the Committee. So my name is Russell Fong from the Department of Law Enforcement. And the first year, fiscal year 26, would be 5 million. Okay. This will include eight positions. And this will all be investigators with one clerk. And in the second year, fiscal 27, will be 2.2 million. That's the cost.

I was under the impression that Department of Law Enforcement also wanted to do like testing, laboratory testing, because HPD is overburdened with their own explosive issues. Is any of this money going to start developing explosive lab testing for DLE?

Yes. Well, actually in this numbers that we gave to you, 2.1 is actually for the establishment of the lab.

Okay. Thank you, Chair.

I'm sorry, could you repeat those positions again, and the costs? I was writing it down.

Position is there's eight positions total, seven exempt investigators, one full time of office clerk. And that would make up the eight. And this would be from the CID division, all investigators.

Okay. And the amount?

Oh, I'm sorry. So the amount is 1.375. 1.3, 1.4 million.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Members, any other questions? Just a follow up to that. Are those calculations based on the additional submission from the former Director that DLE submitted to Ways and Means during informational briefing? Because this bill is a little different where it's less positions than what the initial request was.

Yes, we reduced it to eight.

Okay, so it's based on the, what's appropriated in this bill? The reduction. The reduction of personnel. Okay, thank you. Okay, Members, any other questions? If not, thank you. Anyone else? Last call on SB 222. Okay. If not, Members, we're going to go into making decisions here on our agenda. Okay.

For our first bill on SB 227, relating to fireworks. Recommendation is to pass as is. And in the Committee report, we'll note the amounts that were indicated from the Department of Law Enforcement in their verbal testimony here today. So we'll put that in the Committee report. With that, any discussion on the recommendation? If not, Vice Chair. Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you so much. Our next item is SB 476. This is relating to fireworks. Recommendation here is to defer because we have fines and penalties in other fireworks bills. So we'll defer SB 476. And then for our last bill is SB 222. This is relating to fireworks. This is the extension of the illegal fireworks task force. Recommendation is to pass as is. Any discussion? If not, Vice Chair. Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you so much. This concludes our business for today. We're adjourned.