House Standing Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Welcome, everyone, to the House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs. It is Friday, January 31st, last day of January, 2:00pm here in Conference Room 325. We're here. Myself, David Tarnas, Chair, Vice Chair Mahina Poepoe, and Member Representative Garner Shimizu. And we're here for the purposes of considering numerous measures. Just some housekeeping before we get started for testifiers.

Please. If you would be so kind as to keep your testimony to two minutes, I will ask you to summarize at that point. And if you're testifying from far away via Zoom, please keep yourself muted and your video off until you testify, and then turn your video off and mute yourself afterward. That would help us out.

If you have technical issues on Zoom, just use the chat function. You can check in with our very smart IT folks here, and they might be able to help you out. But please don't send me any messages on chat because I don't get them. If you're disconnected, don't panic.

Just rejoin as soon as you can, and I'll try to fit you in so you can finish your testimony. If the power goes off here and we have a network failure in the building and we have to stop the hearing, we will reschedule this and post appropriate notice so everyone knows what's going on.

If you're testifying via Zoom, please do not use any trademark or copyrighted images. That kicks us off of YouTube, and that's a problem. And please conduct yourself with aloha. Please refrain from profanity or uncivil behavior. It's okay to disagree, but let's not be disagreeable.

We can all work together to try to do the best thing for the State of Hawaii and its people. So let's move on to our measures today. First up, we have House Bill 410, which is the bill for the budget of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

It appropriates monies to fund the operating expenses of the Office of Hawaiian affairs for the fiscal biennium beginning July 1, 2025 and ending June 30, 2027. First up, we have. First up, we have testifier from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Representatives. OHA stands on its written testimony, and I'll be around to answer any questions.

Okay, thank you. I run my Committee a little differently. Just to make sure that everyone who's listening and who's here is able to understand what's going on. I ask folks to just at least highlight your testimony instead of just standing on your testimony, because there are some folks that don't read the testimony.

So if you could just highlight the important things in your testimony that would help me out. And everybody who's watching, thank you very much.

So OHA's submission for the biennium is a increase from our previous base budget of 3 million each fiscal year. We are coming in front of the committees and asking for a slight increase for cost of living or cost of inflation.

And you know, as a best practice, as a best business practice, you know, we, we don't think it's wise to continue to come in with the same ask every year knowing that the cost of inflation is very real here in Hawaii. And we don't want to rob Peter to pay Paul.

We want to make sure that we can continue to provide quality services without having to reallocate from existing budgets. So the reality of doing business in Hawaii is that we have to keep up with the pace of inflation.

So there's a little bump there and you're going to see that reflected in our requests in OHA 175 and 160 and so an increase there for programs and services.

So looking at efforts that OHA will put towards housing, education, health outcomes and economic resilience, the big or the increase that is most significant is the $1.2 million that we're asking for both fiscal years and that is to fund 13 full time employees that will help to deliver on Mana i Mauli Ola.

So we have a new strategy and implementation team and we need these staff Members to ensure that we can put forth our strategic plan with fidelity the way that OHA was previously structured.

We have very discreet functional areas like compliance or communications, but we didn't have any personnel that were specifically tasked with the Kuleana of effectuating the strategic plan in these very specific areas and why it's important that we have that level of expertise is one, it's a 15 year plan and it's a very ambitious plan.

And as you know, just the four areas that I've described, they're heavy lifts and they need to be done with a team that is comes with expertise and acumen in those areas. They need to have these built in networks.

As we know, Hawaii is a very small place and to be able to do this work, we're not going to be able to even do it with the 13 people. We're going to have to do this in collaboration and in coordination with others. And then lastly, you know, the ecosystems in each of these four distinct areas.

Strategic areas Hawaii is a unique place and how we do business here can be challenging. And having folks that really understand the constraints, the opportunities within. Within these strategic areas was super critical for us. So that 1.2 million will be for those 13 staff Members.

But the biggest return on investment and what I had shared in the budget hearings was that we are proposing that these 13 individuals would be able to work very closely with the executive branch departments.

So knowing that the money committees are going to be appropriating $20 billion, if not more, in the upcoming, you know, when they go to conference, that 20 billion, much of that money is actually serving Native Hawaiians.

Well, first off, there's a trust, responsibility, and obligation to all Native Hawaiians first that the Legislature and the Executive Branch and Judiciary have to Native Hawaiians. But much of that money in many of the programs and services are geared towards Native Hawaiians. We are, unfortunately, we represent the highest disparities in many.

In many of the things that are plaguing Hawaii. Homelessness, uninsured, child welfare. And for an example, the budget that's most likely going to be approved for the Department of Human Services. $4 billion. 4 billion out of the 20 billion is a large chunk. Native Hawaiians are overrepresented in many of those Department of Human Services programs.

Tanf, child welfare. I mean, it goes on and on. And OHA has the statutory mandate in Chapter 10 to go into the departments and work with them on process, on policy, on their programs and services, looking at the performance that is currently occurring and working very collaboratively with them.

We've never done this at OHA, but we think it's a very strategic way to go about the work. Our $60 million budget, which the request that I'm putting before this Committee is a very small amount in our overall $60 million budget.

But the bigger play for us is really the coordination and the cooperation that we're going to have when we go into the state departments and work with them very specifically on how we can better the trajectory of Native Hawaiians and addressing those disparities.

Never been done before, and I'm hoping this Committee will support us in being able to do that.

Mahalo.

Mahalo.

Next person that we know has requested to provide testimony is Kawaio Hawaiki Anakalea.

Mahalo for pronouncing my name correctly. Guys, I just had a tooth removed, so my. My mouth is numb, but.

Please proceed.

My name is Kawaio Hawaiki Anakalea. I was born and raised in Waianae, and I moved to the mainland. For 16 years. I've been in New York and I just moved back home. I'm opening up a new spa. I'm really excited to get settled here. But to even testify here, I feel it's degrading.

Why are we begging for our own money? You guys have been taking from the natives of this islands for, for hundreds of years. Like when are you guys going to give us our birthright money?

I applied with, with OHA for, for a business loan because I'm trying to get my spa started and they denied me because my credit score wasn't so, wasn't high enough. And Department of Hawaiian Homelands. I've been on the list for, for 20 years waiting for land from them.

Like, I just, I don't understand why as Kanaka Maoli, why we're constantly treated like second class citizens in our own land when you guys are profiting, making money off of, off of our land and not giving us our birthright reparations.

Okay, so yeah, I wanted, I wanted to stand on my testimony and also to say that, you know, you guys, you guys owe us a lot. We shouldn't have to be standing here if you guys claim to represent us. Do the right thing, give us our, give us the resources that we need. And yeah. Mahalo.

I appreciate your frustration. Mahalo. Next person that we're told would like to testify is Cindy Freitas on Zoom. Please proceed.

Aloha. My name is Cindy Freitas. I'm a native Hawaiian descendant of the native inhabitants in Hawaii prior to 1778. Born and raised in Hawaii. I'm also a culture practitioner from Mauka to Makai. I'm in support of of HB 410.

Appropriating funds for the operational expense of OHA for the facial two years ensures the continuations of OHA's work in advancing the well being of Native Hawaiian community by funding community programs and cultural preservations.

This initiative has both economic and social impact implementations that help up lift the Native Hawaiians and support their rights to land, resources and a self determination. Thank you. Have a good day.

Mahalo. Ms. Freitas. We have received numerous other testimony in writing. Another 38 testifiers in support and three in opposition. Is there anyone else here in the room or on Zoom that would like to testify on House Bill 410? Yes, please. Please introduce yourself and proceed.

Yes. Aloha, Representative, Vice Chair and Chair. My name is Kimmer Nahonu Horson Big Horse and I've been here since 2008. I've been here at the Capitol DLNR all sorts of these sort of meetings and stuff. So I just support the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and their budget.

Being Native American, also tribal, the Federal Government seems to just throw money at the problems. Millions of dollars and money isn't the only thing that I believe native people need. Indigenous people need so.

But I approve of this, of course support and I hope that all the Hawaiians and the so called hostages of these kingdoms and militarily belligerently occupied territories that our native peoples live in in the United States of America that they will be compensated and restored to their prior kingdoms and sovereignty. Not just money.

But I support this Bill. Mahalo.

Mahalo. Aloha. If you could just so we could keep it for our records. If you could provide us with your name. So we.

I just submitted. Sorry.

Oh, you did? Okay. Excellent. No, no, it's fine. Let's go. Mahalo. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 410 if not, questions Members? Representative Garcia.

Thank you. Chair for OHA. Great bill. I am supporting it. Just a question about funding and the revenue sources to oha. Any update on the Public Land Trust Revenue working group that was established? Any findings? Any updates from that? And is OHA getting the full 20% of public land Trust revenue?

And how long have they not got to knit for?

There's a few questions in there. Okay. No, OHA is not getting its full 20%. In 2022, Act 226 basically took the $15.1 million payment, annual payment that was set by then Governor Linda Lingo. The 2022 Legislature raised it to 21.5. And that's what we've been operating off of since. In 2016, OHA did have an NLK audit.

NLK is the name of the contractor that did an audit. And in 2016, based off of all of the revenues that were being put forth by the various state agencies, OHA at that time should have been paid annually, at least 79 million. That was in 2016. So you can only imagine what it would be in 2025.

In 2022, in that same Act 226, a Public Land working group, Public Land Trust Working Group was put together and it was comprised of six individuals, three that were assigned by the Governor. So that was Chair Don Cheng. It is now Deputy Ryan Kanakaole from dlnr, and Luis Salaveria, Director of Budget and Finance.

On the OHA side, it was Chair Emeritus Hululindsey, and at the time it was Trustee Mililani Trask. It is now Trustee Brickwood Galuteria, and Sherry Broder, Attorney on behalf of oha. So the, the working group has met over two years and they had several objectives that they were hoping to achieve. One was to get an accurate inventory.

Two was to address basically the process in which the revenues were reported and basically to come up with a formula on how we were to proceed moving forward.

I will tell you that when I joined OHA one year ago, so I came in in the year of that working group, and one of the requests that was made by that working group was that each State Department who has to turn in revenue reports to DLNR to provide an accounting to the group.

I will tell you the submission rate was extremely low. And that's bothersome because this was a legislatively mandated working group that has representatives from the governor's cabinet. And when the, you know, when the request went out to, to the Executive branch directors, the response rate was extremely low. Now, that questions the apathy, right?

And even the enforcement of the Kuleana that these departments have. So again, the swirl continues, the wait continues to get accurate information. In 2022, Chair Chang did put fourth in her Executive budget for DLNR, a $900,000 request, which this body did approve.

And it was for the PLTIS improvements that was important because the current PLTIS system is substandard. It doesn't have the controls that you would expect it to have, especially when it's the type of information that is being put into it, because it is the basis of revenues that the Office of Hawaiian affairs should be receiving.

In fact, it was during one of the Public Land Trust Working Group meetings that the administrator from Oha, so there are several people that have administrative rights to go into the system that he was able to demonstrate live to the working group and to the public who was watching that he could go in and he could change numbers.

You could change 1,000 to 100,000 or 100,000 to 1,000. That's problematic when you don't have versioning, you don't have control of locking people out. There's no way to know who's logging in at any given time and changing things. Now, budget and Finance would never have that kind of system. When we're talking about the state budget, right?

There has to be a level of Fidelity, right, in the types of systems that we're using, how we're collecting the information, and let's face it, administrations change, staffing changes. And although there are instructions, how those instructions are interpreted from Department to Department is problematic.

What's most troubling now, if all of that wasn't troubling enough, one of the things that was identified was that in DLNR's mandate for the PLT is it is not their job to verify the data, right. That's coming in. It's just their job to receive it. So there's no verification of what each Department is putting forth. That's problematic.

It's wrought with issues. And these were all things that were identified by the working group. It was put into a report. That report was submitted about a month ago. It is on the legislative website for anybody to read. We are putting forth a Bill.

There's a companion, there's a Senate Bill and a House Bill, and it is asking for $1.0 million to start the inventory. And we don't think that it's going to happen in one year's time. So we will most likely have to come back for another appropriation, but we want to get it started. So similar, you know, and.

And on that same track, Governor Green, through Luis Salivaria, has, Has committed, through a governor's message at some point during the session to come down with a governor's message for $750,000 towards the inventory and would be appropriated to DLNR, expended by OHA. OHA will match that.

We will come in in our budget with 250,000, and that comes up with the $1 million that's also coming in through that Bill with appropriation. So we're hoping that one way or another, finally, we will be able to get this work done.

At the end of the day, once we get an accurate inventory, it will have to be paid. The apathy and the slow movement on wanting to get the accuracy is a travesty, and it needs to be addressed.

And again, this body, the Legislature as a whole, does have a trust, responsibility, and obligation to native Hawaiians, and it is the absolute pono thing to do. But more importantly, it is the law. Mahalo.

Mahalo. And if I. If I may, Representative Garcia, the House Bill 1358, which Director referred to on the public land Trust working group, is triple referral. Water land then comes to this Committee and then to finance, and it is currently scheduled for Water and Land Hearing on Tuesday the 4th.

So I hope that we will be able to consider that measure and go into this matter more in depth at that time.

Mahalo, Chair, certainly. Thank you.

Very important. Very important matter. Other questions? Members represent Shimizu.

Excuse me. Thank you. OHA, I had a question just to clarify. I agree with your statements that you need to coordinate with other state agencies. And I thought I heard you say it's the first time that it's being done. Is that correct?

That is correct. OHA has never worked collaboratively with each of the state departments to really examine the processes, the internal policies, the programs and services. We've been kind of doing them in our own lanes. Right. I mean, and it's hard for just state departments to collaborate and coordinate.

So, oha, you know, being autonomous, you know, again, you know, there's a recognition, you know, coming on as the new administrator that this work is too big to do a loan. And again, you know, we're not getting paid our fair share, so even more so, we're resource constrained.

At the end of the day, the 60 million that we put forth through our native Hawaiian trust funds is just not enough to change the trajectory. We have the Kuleana. We want to accomplish the Kuleana, but it's. It's bigger than what we are resource. The gorilla in the room is the Executive Branch at 20 billion.

60 million is a drop in the bucket of 20 billion. We need to go where the resources are at, and we need to work smarter, not harder.

And I think that this is the best return on investment that this Legislature is going to have, because when we put it in general funds, we're on the hook to you folks. The Executive Branch is on the hook to you folks. And we need to get results. We need to come back and be accountable to this body.

I want to be accountable because I want results. I want to be action oriented. We need to do this work.

Great. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Mahalo.

Mahalo. Any other questions, Members? Mahalo. I did ask numerous questions during the budget briefing and Finance Committee, and I appreciate the information you provided then and have studied your budget and your additional materials. And so I don't have any additional questions to ask at this time.

So I appreciate all your hard work on this budget and your good work at the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. If there's no further questions from Members, then we'll go on to the next measure. Thank you. Next measure is House Bill 304 relating to the Hawaiian language.

This measure requires that the Hawaiian version of a law be held binding if the law in question was originally drafted in Hawaiian and then translated into English. First up, we have testimony from the Judiciary. Welcome.

Chair Tarnas, Vice Chair Poepoe, Members of the Committee. Al Hanui Kakou Ovono o. Johanna Choptam. On behalf of the Judiciary, I am.

The Program Administrator for the Hawaiian Language Program, and we're here to say that we do support this bill which holds the Olalo binding if it is drafted in Olalo, because it looks to the original law in its original language, whether it be English or Hawaiian, to find its intent.

It reinforces Olalo Hawaii's status as Olalo as an official language, which we. Which then reaffirms that laws drafted in Hawaiian can stand alongside those written in English. Mahalo.

Al Mahalo. Next we have testimony from the Attorney General. Welcome. Please proceed.

Aloha, Chair Tarnas, Vice Chair Poepoe. Hokulei Lindsey, Deputy Attorney General. The Department of the Attorney General appreciates the intent of this bill and provides the following comments. By broadly amending HRS section 1-13 to allow the Hawaiian version of the law to.

To supersede the English version of the law may lead to ambiguities in the application and interpretation of the laws.

To mitigate against these ambiguities, we recommend amending the proviso at page three, lines two through five of the bill to define the bill's application to laws originally drafted in Hawaiian that have not been later amended, codified, re codified, or. Or reenacted in English. I'm available for questions if there are any.

Mahalo.

We've received additional testimony. We have one more person that said that they would testify. Pikachu Billionaire. Online. Not present. Okay, so that would be in support and Then we've received another testimony from another individual in support and testimony and opposition from another individual. Is there anyone else here wishing to testify in House Bill 304?

Yes, please come on up. Please introduce yourself again, please.

Yes, hello. Kimmer Nahonu Horson Big Horse. Morning Vice Chairs and representatives. Aloha. Okay. I support this bill because the Hawaiian language bill because the. The interpretation of the context, the original of the original olalo Hawaii language can be misinterpreted in context, in meanings in different.

As she said, like she suggested, you know, like it might be misconstrued in translation, but that can be taken care of with a translator. That's a simple fix. And as I've said before, this is a belligerently military United States military occupied kingdom. I don't know why it needs to go through Congress or.

Or the United States needs to be involved at all. The United States government over a kingdom. That is the only, the only reason why we're not all speaking the Hawaiian language, Olelo Hawaii right now is because we don't have nuclear bombs, we don't have machine guns. We don't have the military capabilities of the United States.

So we cannot keep addressing all these genocidal, ecocidal, ethnocidal problems with violence. And that's all I have to say. Mahalo.

Mahalo. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Yes, please. Well, you're brave with your painful tooth. Less than an hour ago.

Sorry.

Please proceed again.

My name is Kawaio Hawaiki Anakalea and I am in support of this bill. I just wanted to mention that three of my grandparents are full blooded Hawaiian. Okay. My other Papa, he was 50. I don't speak the language. It's painful. Right now I'm enrolled in, UH. I'm gonna, you know, take responsibility to learn it.

But it's, you know, for. For them to feel like, oh, we shouldn't change it. To me, that is just disrespectful. Olalo should be first. Hawaiian should be first. And that's period. Thank you.

Mahalo. Anyone else wishing to testify in this measure? If not questions, Members, any questions represent Poepoe.

I think first for the Attorney General. I was curious if you would be able to tell me how many laws that were originally drafted in Hawaiian have not been later amended, codified, re. Codified or enacted in England.

I don't know at the present moment how the number. But we could certainly look into that and try to get you something in writing.

Okay. I'm just curious about how effective this would actually be with the proposed amendment. Does judiciary do you. Same question. Okay.

Come on up. Everyone on TV wants to see you.

We don't have numbers, but we do have account of cases where we were running when Hawaii In Kingdom Times, 1800s, were running a bilingual legal system, when the laws were both in English and Hawaiian. And back then everyone's speaking both languages. There have only been five cases back in a span of 100 years.

And since then, one case after that and then a few more. The first case since the.

But these. You're referring to cases. Lawsuits. Yeah, lawsuits. Laws. Representative was talking about laws.

No, so I. We don't have. Thank you.

Okay.

Representative shimizu, question for AG's office, please. Thank you for your testimony. Excuse me. As I read your testimony and the additional language that you're wanting to amend, it would totally negate the purpose of this Bill, wouldn't it?

No, it's trying to address uncertainties that may arise. So if there were two laws enacted at the same time, one in English and one in Hawaiian, it would almost be virtually unknowable. Which was the original version and what we should refer to same. If it was originally drafted and then later amended over time in English.

As the Bill is written, it creates uncertainty, potential uncertainty in the interpretation of things that have changed over time. So all the proviso does is say if something has changed in English over time, we're going to stick with the English version.

If there's something that has not been subject to amendment, recodification or reenactment in English, then the Hawaiian version stands.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Any other questions, Members? If not, thank you very much. Let's move on to the next measure, House Bill 603, relating to native Hawaiian business marketing. This measure requires the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to administer and oversee a Native Hawaiian Marketing Program to promote businesses owned by Native Hawaiians through marketing and technical assistance.

First up, we have the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

Aloha. My name is Poni Askew. I'm the Director of Economic and Business Resilience with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

Aloha.

Aloha. Mahalo for having us here today. So, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs would like to mahalo the authors of HB 603 and the Native Hawaiian Caucus for introducing this measure.

This Bill proposes to establish a Native Hawaiian Marketing Program and Label, which will allow consumers to support Native Hawaiian-owned businesses, much like they may choose to purchase a USDA Organic Label, or "Made in America," or even "Made in Hawaii" labeled products.

The Proposed Marketing and Branding Initiative ensures that Native Hawaiian Businesses can benefit from the high market demand for authentic Hawaiian products, providing economic empowerment, while protecting cultural integrity.

While OHA appreciates and supports the intent of this measure to set up a marketing and branding program to support the development and success of Native Hawaiian-owned businesses, we want to ensure that there's an effective implementation and rollout of such a program.

So, we request that the proposed funding be reallocated to allow OHA to convene a working group, to engage with relevant stakeholders about program design implementation and long-term viability.

In particular, OHA is concerned about the enforcement of such Program, of the proposed initiative and how enforcement would be implemented, which would require OHA to collaborate with other state agencies with expertise in such enforcement. So, advancing with other state agencies or businesses and stakeholders, we want to just make sure it's an effective implementation of this plan.

And we want to prioritize research into this area and look forward to a successful implementation. Thank you.

Mahalo. Thank you. Next, we have received four testimonies in support from various individuals. Is there anyone here that would like to testify on HB 603? If not, questions, Members? If not, I have a question, Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Your programs are available to all Hawaiians, not just those...

Correct.

...Who qualify for the Hawaiian Homelands programs...

Correct.

...Which are 50%.

Yes.

We have the quantum.

Yeah. We have the privilege and opportunity to service all Hawaiians in the state.

Okay, great, and I appreciate that. That's a very important responsibility you have. I just wanted to confirm that, in our question, because I want to make sure that the Bill language reflects that.

Oh, thank you. Yeah.

Because it's not exactly clear in the language. So, I just wanted to make sure that that was in fact your Kuleana.

Yes, you're correct. Yeah.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Any other questions? If not, let's move on to the next measure, House Bill 1091, relating to sewer transmission lines.

This measure requires that all county sewer transmission lines on Hawaiian Homelands, in compliance or brought into compliance by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands, are licensed or dedicated to the respective county, within 60 days after the receipt by the appropriate county agency of a completed application for maintenance request.

First up, we have Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Director Kali Watson, lucky us, you're here. Appreciate that.

I think it's very important that I be here, and that's why I'm here. Chairman Tarnas and Vice Chair Poepoe and Members of the Committee. Aloha.

Aloha.

With respect to this particular Bill, Number 1091, obviously it's a cost issue for us, to maintain the sewer line, the transmission lines, as well as facilities tied in with it.

Therefore, once we do have the upgrading, as well as bring it into compliance, we request that, not only the counties take on responsibility, either through a license or dedication by us, but more importantly, give them a timeline. You know, 60 days, kind of like, not a drop dead, but you have to respond within that time.

I think our past experience with the counties such that, you know, we're always running into various, I wouldn't call them excuses, but borderline excuses of why they don't want to take it on.

So, it's very important that, especially when we do bring it into compliance and we submit the application for them to take it on, that they respond in a timely fashion. And that's what this Bill is about.

Mahalo.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else here wishing to testify on this measure, House Bill 1091? If not, questions, Members? Representative Garcia.

Thank you, Chair. For Director Watson, thank you for being here in person. Question, so, the homesteads in Kapolei were built in the late 2007-2008. I've been hearing that—I guess this is an issue there as well—sewer pipes, so does DHHL maintain all the sewer lines in the Kapolei area, all the newer homesteads built from?

Yeah, that's my understanding. Yeah.

Okay. And so, is there a plan to turn it over to the city and county or?

Yeah, we're, I guess, testing the lines to see what the conditions are. Once we're finished with that, as well as trying to see where and what issues there are regarding the compliance, we definitely will submit an application. Assuming this particular Bill passes, give them that 60-day timeline in which to respond.

They've been—this particular island has been a little bit more of a challenge than some of the outer islands.

And I think, moving forward with our new projects, we're going to, up front, be very active in working with the different utility entities to make sure that the sewer and water, as we build it and before we build it, and that we design it and actually have them involved in the process of approving what we're going to build, so that it doesn't become an issue as to whether it's in compliance.

Thank you.

Thank you. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you. Chair. I just wanted to clarify, when it says licensed or dedicated to respective county, based on what you shared, are you saying that that is also a handover to the counties to take responsibility and pretty much ownership of those lines for future maintenance—is that part of it?

Yeah, it's more a license because the ownership stays with the state, and, you know, which account is part of the state. So, it's not really a transfer of the fee title. It's more giving them a legal document where they can go in.

They now have the responsibility because, you know, we've transferred and license them, not only the right to enter, make repairs, make inspections, all of that. So, from a legal standpoint, that's where the license—before, typically, they asked for a right of entry.

I think with a license, which is in our Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, we are allowed to do that, by—we're authorized to do—issue—those kind of license.

So, the future maintenance would be?

Under that license.

Language would be included in the license.

Follow up.

So, the answer is yes, it would be the responsibility.

Thank you. And I guess I think of, besides sewer, what about like electricity roads? Right now, it's falling under the HHL to self.

We do licenses for those two.

You have to self-maintain your—whatever development is your lands right now.

Well, on the roads, yeah, but most, most of them, the county's been pretty good about that, coming in and doing the maintenance, as well as oversight. But you know, it is important that, you know, for example, lights in Kapolei, we got to do the changing.

If a light bulb burns out, we got to go in and make the change. We'd like to give that kind of maintenance over to the city.

So, there's no clear delineation then. It's just kind of like a give-and-take and depends on the property or the relationship with the county?

To a certain extent, yeah.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much. Any other questions? I do have one question, Chair Watson. We have to pay attention to the title of the Bill and this title refer—relating to—sewer transmission lines. So, I think there's some language in the Bill that refers to other sewerage facilities, not just sewer transmission lines.

Right, right.

And so, that would be unfortunately in violation of—it's not consistent with the title. And, and I don't want to have a title problem with this because the Bill could get thrown out.

Yeah.

It could get invalidated if, if we're dealing with matters in the Bill that go beyond what is in the title.

And I—so, what I—if the Committee is willing, what I'm going to recommend is that we move it forward, but we make sure that the language in the Bill sticks with sewer transmission lines and not deal with other sewerage facilities. Because I don't want to risk the Bill by dealing with other sewerage facilities.

It's kind of important that...

I know that's probably what you want—is do other sewage facilities.

Yeah, like lift station.

We have. Yeah. I mean, it's something that we're very strict about, and it's not just us. It could, you know, the Governor could be forced to veto it. The Attorney General would say, hey, this is not consistent with the title.

Okay, well, we'll take whatever we can get.

No, and I think that what you're suggesting is a great thing to do and should be done, but I just wanted to let you know that that's the reality of what we deal with in the legislative process.

So, you're going to take out this language regarding sewage facilities?

Other sewerage facilities. Yeah, because we just need to focus only on what the title says. Sewer transmission lines.

We'll check on the—maybe the Senate version. Maybe they got—I don't know if there is a Senate version.

I'm not sure if it's the same title in the Senate.

But anyway, just in terms of following the proper protocol within our legislative process, we just have to make sure that whatever is in the Bill is consistent with the title. And we noticed that it seemed like it went beyond. That's why sometimes these titles are broader rather than very specific. So anyway.

No, I understand. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions, Members? If not, thank you very much. Director Watson. Let's move on. House Bill 1239 relating to independent legal counsel. This measure authorizes the Hawaiian Homes Commission to retain independent legal counsel with any legal fees owed to be.

With any legal fees owed to be paid by the state and also use the services of the Attorney General as needed. First up, we have testimony from the Attorney General.

Good afternoon, Chair Tarnas. Vice Chair Poepoe Members of the Committee, Craig Iha, Deputy Attorney General. The Department of the Attorney General respectfully opposes this bill. And I just want to highlight three points from our written testimony.

The first is that the Hawaiian Homes Commission is a state board which heads DHHL, which is one of only 19 principal state departments within the Executive Branch. So like other boards, like other state departments, it's subject to the same state laws, of which the Attorney General has very, very unique and deep expertise in.

The second point is that DHHL's mission is to act as an arm of the state in carrying out the state's trust obligations under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. So a claim against DHHL is ultimately a claim against the state and potentially a claim against the public fisc.

And the third point that I'd like to make is that there already exists a mechanism which we do use to allow DHHL to retain independent counsel. It requires the participation of the Attorney General and the approval of the Governor. And we've used that provision a couple of times in the recent past without incident.

And I'm open to any questions. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Next, we have testimony from the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Chair Watson.

Yes. You know, again, respect the Attorney General's Office position on this. However, you know, we would argue that there will and have been times where the two don't really match up. The interests of the state versus the interests of our beneficiaries.

And therefore, you know, we're going to have, and we're going to need advice as well as possibly get into litigation against the state, which we've done in the past.

The fact that the state makes argument that a claim against the Department is a claim against the state, typically the Commission, which has a fiduciary responsibility of carrying out the Wynnums Commission Act, they have that responsibility.

And at times where there is a conflict, it would be, I think, appropriate that they have the access to legal counsel independent of the Attorney General's Office. I do recognize and appreciate that there is a somewhat, I guess, way in which with the approval of the Attorney General and the Governor, we can hire independent counsel.

So we've done that, especially on our Act279 project. We've needed because of the, I guess, the workload and we're kind of cranking it up. So we need that additional assistance where we've gone out with their approval to hire outside counsel, which has been very beneficial in moving the program along.

So in any event, we would ask that because of the conflict, that we be allowed that option of retaining independent counsel independent of the state as well as oversight. Because the Governor as well as the Attorney General could easily say, no, you can't hire it. So what do we do then?

Without this type of statutory authority, that's the only way we could do it. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And we've received written testimony and support from Kanani Kupuniai individual. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 1239? Yes, please.

Aloha again, Representatives, Vice Chair and Representatives. My name is Kimmere Nahonu Horse and Big Horse. I believe this.

I support this Bill because it's like any organization, federal organization, like say the military, and sometimes, let's say the Kanaka are like the personnel, like the soldiers, or they don't have outside legal counsel, they're not allowed essentially the chain of commands and the sort of group think of the brass in the military can override and overpower, you know, the powerless, like the enlisted.

Right. The subordinates. So I agree with this Bill. It shouldn't even. I mean, according to international law, there's no really state Attorney General anyways that is legally here. I mean, the United States here being here is a war crime by international law.

And it's just not being enforced because of course, I just said the nuclear powers and the military violence and aggression here, the belligerent occupation. So it's really important to get outside legal counsel and it not be monopolized by the State of Hawaii. Mahalo.

Mahalo. Anyone else wishing to testify in this measure, if not questions. Members first. Representative Garcia.

Thank you. Chair for Director Watson. You mentioned the possible conflict. I know. So the AG currently has a representative at all the Commission meetings, and they are the legal counsel as of right now. Right. Has the Commission itself discussed this. This particular legislation and has the Commission taken a position in support of.

Yeah, the Commission approved this particular legislation. Okay. Okay, cool.

Thank you, Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, chair. Question for AG's office, please. The way I understand this bill is there is a list of state departments and entities that are already able to hire independent counsel. And part of this bill is to allow DHHL to be part of this list for those people that are already on the list.

And if they choose to hire independent counsel, does the state pay for those services?

Yeah, I mean, ultimately the state pays for everything because the payment requires an appropriation from the Legislature. So in this case, if the bill passes, unless the intent is for DHHL to use its trust funds, the Legislature would need to make a general fund appropriation to pay for this legal counsel.

Right. I. Excuse me. I'm sorry. I'm just trying to establish the fact that the current people on the list who have this right, who, who do hire a independent counsel, that the state already pays for them. Is that a fact or no?

The state does, but it's a little. You know, the bill mentions the state, so I don't. I can't tell you off the top of my head whether the agencies on this list have special funds. For example, whether there are other sources of public money that are used. That's. That's not general funds.

So I just wanted to make that distinction.

Right, right. But whether it's general funds or special funds is. It's. The state is paying. Right.

They. They're all public funds.

Right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much. Other questions? Vice Chair Poepoe first, and then I have some questions. Please proceed.

For the Attorney General. In your testimony, you say that private attorneys retained by the Hawaiian Homes Commission would not possess the necessary breath of knowledge and experience available with the Department of the Attorney General. How did you make this conclusion?

That is our. That is based on our department's experience and the experience of our attorneys. We are the largest firm public interest law firm in the state, and our specialty is government law.

It's your opinion, this isn't your opinion, that there are no other private attorneys in the state that could do what you do, or did you do an analysis of all the private attorneys to make a determination?

We didn't do any kind of specific survey of private attorneys because you have.

Authorized the Department through the process to seek outside counsel, which indicates to me that there are some areas of knowledge that you did see beneficial and perhaps not within your capacity.

So I could give you a few examples if that would help.

Okay.

DHHL has independent counsel. They had independent counsel in the Nelson lawsuit. The Watanabe firm has litigation expertise. Dhhl, I believe, has independent counsel on some of its telecom matters. The Ashwin and Wriston firm represents DHHL in some of those cases. And the Imanaka firm does work for DHHL on some development matters.

And those are the three that come to my mind.

Okay, thank you.

If I may just have. Before you sit down, sir, the Attorney General, I wanted to ask another question. Could you tell the Committee, what are these other agencies that have the authority to retain independent legal counsel?

There are actually a number of agencies. It's HRS 28.8.3.

HRS 28-8.3.

8.3. And if you give me just a second, I can.

Okay, so it's in the bill. You don't have to look it up.

So this is just. I would like to note, however, that. Go ahead, please. I would like to note that none of these agencies are principal departments of the Executive Branch. They're either entities that are outside of the Executive Branch, such as OHA or, uh. Or there are. They are very split.

Specific divisions within departments or are there very specific attached agencies?

Okay. And the agencies that do have the authority to retain independent legal counsel, does the Legislature have to appropriate, let's say the Office of Elections. Does the Legislature have to appropriate specific funds for that council or they take it out of their current budget?

I really don't know for all of these agencies. Okay, well, I would assume that they would have to take it out of their operating budget unless they have trust funds, which don't require appropriation.

Right. Because I don't remember having to do appropriations for the Insurance Division, Kahoolawe Island Reserve Commission, Division of Conservation, Consumer Advocacy, you know, things like that.

Would you like us to get back to you on that or.

Yeah, I would like to understand this better because I want to be equitable across in our treatment of this. And this has been a recurring issue. I mean, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands has requested this numerous times. There are a bunch of divisions and offices and authorities that have their own ability to go out.

So it would be useful for me to understand how it's financed. Thank you.

Any other questions, Members? If not, we'll go on. Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Next we're going to hear about House Bill 1351, relating to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act 1920, as amended.

This increases the limit of the state's liability from 100 million to 500 million for monies borrowed by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands or loans made to lessees that are guaranteed by the Department. First up, Department of Budget and Finance with comments? Next, Department of Hawaiian Homelands?

I guess one of the things that we're doing a lot of is with the Act 279, the 600 million, we're starting to do a lot more projects. And in order to accommodate and provide funding for especially the vertical construction, we need to lift this limitation from 100 million to 500 million.

That will allow us to have access to more loan products as well as the Department itself taking out and borrowing money to do some of the infrastructure work and what have you. Again, it's really directed more towards our beneficiaries' access to, you know, loan products so they can build their homes.

Anything else? Okay, thank you very much. And we've received written testimony and support from Kanani Kapuniai and Cindy Freitas. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in House Bill 1351? Please. Please proceed.

Do I need to say my name and all that stuff?

It's helpful for everyone who's watching in case they just joined us.

Okay. Aloha. My name is Kimmer Nahonu Horsen and Big Horse. I support this bill, HB 1351. And just remind the House that Prince Kuhio Jonah Kalanianaʻole originally mandated the blood quantum to be 25%, not the current 50% percent. There's more beneficiaries there on Turtle Island. Many, many, many. Keep that in mind as well.

This was overruled by the racist, gritty U.S. Republican Party. And I support this bill, HB 1351 for more housing sustainability for native Hawaiians, Kanaka Maoli, 25% as Jonah-- Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalanianaʻole originally intended as Native Hawaiians are the leading demographic in houselessness. Mahalo.

Mahalo. Let me just ask, Ms. Freitas, if you're still online, would you like to testify? We have your written testimony.

Yes, I think. Aloha. This is Cindy Freitas. Mahalo. Yes, I support this. This is a great opportunity for a lot of us Native Hawaiians to help with the crunch of making a loan and having this increase to help the Department to help us. Thank you. Have a good day.

Mahalo. Anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 1351? If not, questions, Members? I have a question for-- well, I guess it would be for the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Did you have a chance to read the testimony from the Department of Budget and Finance? They're worried about liability and the state--

The increase in the state's liability will affect the amount of general obligation bonds the state can issue within the debt limit. And the state will need to appropriate general funds to cover the liability if the guarantee is called.

Since Department of Budget and Finance is not here, I would encourage you to meet with them and talk with them about this so that you can have some-- What I'm going to recommend to the Committee is that I would recommend we would move this on to Finance for further consideration.

But this issue about liability is one that the Finance Committee will have to address.

And before--If the Finance Committee decides to have a hearing on this bill, I think it would benefit you and Budget and Finance to have had a conversation and discuss this to figure out how to address it, because I think that's a critical issue that-- house finance.

So if you would be so kind to do that, that'd be great. Okay, thank you. Any other questions or concerns? Okay, let's move on to the next measure. Thank you very much to the testifiers. Next measure, House Bill 1362, relating to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands.

This measure appropriates funds to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands to expand the sewer network and lines within and throughout the Keaukaha homestead. First up, we have Hawaiian Homes Commissioner from Kauai in support, Dennis Neves. And then I'll ask the Department to come up to provide testimony next.

Yeah, thank you, Chairman Tarnas, Vice Chair Poepoe, Members of the Committee. With respect to this particular bill, it's really to address a fairly long and bad situation in the Keaukaha area. The situation is kind of an environmental tragedy in the sense that Puhi Bay is continuing to be polluted by sewage effluent.

Therefore, there's a need to not only fix the county's sewer system, but more importantly, allow our homesteaders, especially those with existing cesspools, eventually to also hook up to the county sewer system. But one of the challenges is the cost of the infrastructure.

And so on our side, what we want to do is we need an allocation, the 6 million we're asking in this particular bill, to assist in that overall process to address and remedy the continued pollution of Puhi Bay.

Thank you very much. Next, we've received testimony in support from the County of Hawaii, from Mayor Kimo Alameda, and testimony in support from three individuals. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 1362? If not, questions, Members? Representative Shimizu.

Question, Chair. Thank you, Chair. This Chair, thank you. I was just wondering if the county provides what you're asking for, will DHHL still incur costs for individual home hookups to this provision?

Well, yeah, I understand your question and that that's been a, you know, real challenge regarding the existing cesspool situation. There's a law that requires conversion by a certain deadline. And so we're faced with a situation where the obvious solution is to hook up, but there's the cost to maybe do that on a temporary basis, having a independent sewer system which the homesteader can hook up to and use on an interim basis. The county is--

And we're kind of working with the county to try and address the bigger pictures, which I actually walked the facility and I was shocked by how in what poor condition it is. And it's actually dysfunctional, so I can see why it's continuing to pollute Puhi Bay.

And it's just an ongoing problem that not only our homesteaders have to deal with because they use the park air, right, adjacent. You know, you can smell the sewer system. And then we also have plans to do major development in the area in Makuu, as well as Pana'ewa and Keaukaha.

So the bigger picture is to fix the sewer system that addresses not only Keaukaha, but some of our other lands that we're trying to develop. So we've gotten active in trying to work with the county. We've collectively worked together to access federal funds. This is just part of the entire system that we're trying to put together.

And with respect to the homesteaders, that's a challenge, too. We're going to have to figure out a way which is the least costly to our beneficiaries, especially those with existing cesspools.

Okay I got it. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Representative Garcia?

Thank you, Chair. For Director Watson, the bill appropriate $6 million. Do you folks estimate that is the right amount to do this project in Keaukaha? $6 million?

It's probably a little high, but, you know, with the cost of construction and materials going up, that's been our experience with the 28 projects we're doing, costs are going up, so we have to be making adjustments. So 6 million is a little high.

Thank you.

Thank you. Other questions?

I have a question on the same matter because your testimony says DHHL would like to expedite work by installing new sewer lines in separate phases, but would seek an estimated $8 million for the required survey and inspections of the infrastructure needed to expand and make necessary upgrades to our century old homestead.

All right, does that mean that you'd rather-- you're requesting 8 million instead of 6 million?

I misspoke. It's kind of small. I got old eyes, so I mistook the eight for six. 8 million, sorry.

Okay, so you're correct, Representative. He's actually asking for more.

Maybe make it 10, you know.

Just making sure that you, I mean you must have done your due diligence to come up with the eight. So that's what you're asking for?

Yeah, that's what I'm asking for.

Okay. You need longer arms I guess.

I got to bring it closer.

Okay, There you go. Bring it up closer. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? If Not. Thank you very much. Let's move on to the next measure. House Bill 1457, relating to tax increment financing. This measure authorizes the Hawaiian Homes Commission to designate tax tax increment districts that may utilize tax increment financing.

First up, we have the Attorney General.

Good afternoon. Chair Tarnas, Vice Chair Poepoe, and Members of the Committee. I'm Deputy Attorney General Rodney Char. The Department of the Attorney General offers the following comments. House Bill 1457 may be subject to challenge under Article 8, Section 3 of the Hawaii Constitution. Article 8, Section 3 mandates that the counties have exclusive authority over real property taxation.

By requiring the counties to adopt a designated tax district, this bill may infringe on the county's exclusive constitutional authority over real property taxation. Thank you for this opportunity. I'll be available for questions.

Thank you very much. Next, we have testimony from the Department of Hawaiian Homelands.

Thank you. Yeah, we recognize that the authority does lay with the counties, but if you look at the bill, it requires, you know, the counties to actually approve and pass ordinance implementing this district. So it's not like we unilaterally. And we'd hope that the counties would be receptive to this idea.

I know the counties have been very supportive of our program with respect to Maui County, they've set aside, I believe, 30% of their get waivers were assigned to them. We've also received about 20 million from the City and County of Honolulu in CIP funding.

So across the board, I think there is this willingness to try to figure out ways in which we can address the needs of the 29,000 that we have on the wait list. We need 6 billion.

So all these different approaches, including this incremental tax district assignment and approval by the county, is one way to Fund some of our infrastructure costs.

Thank you very much. And we received comments from the Tax foundation of Hawaii. Are they online? Please proceed. Mr. Yamachika or representative. There you are, sir. Please proceed.

Please unmute yourself.

Oops. Sorry about that. Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation of Hawaii. We largely echo the concerns.

Mr. Yamachika, we can barely hear you. If you could speak up.

Okay, let me. This better?

Yes.

Great. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation of Hawaii. We largely echo the concerns of the Attorney General. If the bill says the county can adopt the ordinance if it wants to, that's fine.

If it says you gotta adopt it, which is how the bill is drafted now, then I think it transgresses constitutional boundaries. You can't force the county to mess with the real property tax system because they are the primary authority under the constitution of the State of Hawaii to implement that tax. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else here wishing to testify on House Bill 1457? If not. Questions Members? Representative Perruso.

The AG's office, please. So as I read the amending language, I read it as a may and not shall.

I believe the amendment says shall in the underlying portion on page two. It says the county. At first it says the Commission shall or may. And then I believe it's line six says county council shall adopt a.

That's sort of the problem. So if that language. If that one word was changed to may, then it would be permissible.

I haven't done the analysis on that, but if it was, I'd be more than happy to. I. I couldn't really say. It just. I think it's the aspect of requiring the county to adopt this ordinance that was.

So it's the requirement that the county adopt it. But yes, just giving them the authority to adopt it does not violate the constitution.

I don't really. I mean, there might be other issues that arise. So I don't want to say it doesn't violate the constitution. There are other separation of powers arguments.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Other questions. Question for the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Have you ever. Has the Department ever gone through the existing process of establishing through county ordinance a community facilities district, which is a type of tax increment district, in order to be able to avail yourself of this financing? Because that seems like it would work.

Yeah, it does seem like it would work, but I'm not aware of the department ever doing that because I think.

From my understanding it's set up so that if 50% plus one property owners in the area agree to it, the. The county council would then pass an ordinance that would establish that because tax increment financing is basically paid for through their property taxes.

Right.

So the individuals who are homesteaders, do they pay their own property taxes?

Well, there's a seven year exemption, then there's a flat fee after that. And with respect to the assessment, there's assessment and then they're charged accordingly after the seven year exemption.

But the individual homesteaders pay property taxes to the county or does the Department pay that?

Well, to be quite Frank, this particular approach that's being talked about really is where you're looking at the other, I guess, people or entities within that incremental tax district to generate property taxes. It doesn't change what they pay.

It's just a matter of a set aside, so to speak, of what they're paying for the specific purpose of helping the Department, whether it be putting in infrastructure or helping pay for housing. Then you have the incremental increases. As the property taxes go up, that amount that's set aside also goes up.

So it's a good way to not only provide revenue for debt service, especially if you're going to put in infrastructure and borrow a bunch of money to put in infrastructure.

So this is not really directed and it really doesn't work if it's strictly the beneficiaries in a housing program that generate the taxes because they pay very little taxes to begin with. It's a surrounding individuals and entities that their tax revenue and it's really dependent upon the county.

That's why the county has to buy into this approach because they're giving up that tax revenue. Most counties don't want to do that.

When you refer to the surrounding property. Owners, are they within that district? Are they outside of Hawaiian homelands, the home area?

I believe, and that's a question I had were there. This is restricted to just our lands. We do have a variety of lands that for example, in Kauaihai we have industrial parks, we have, you know, developments that not only have warehouses, malls that the tenants they pay taxes to the county.

So if that were designated as incremental district, which we could then have the counties give us a portion of the revenues they collect in property taxes from these various entities within that district.

It sounds like there's still a lot of things to be worked out with this.

Yes, it's been tried in California.

And I appreciate that this is potentially another financing mechanism that you want to. That's what it is. I'm just trying to get clear whether or not you've ever tried it through the standard. Not here. Okay, thank You. Any other questions, Members? If not, thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Let's go on to House Bill 871, relating to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, clarifies that Act 130, Session Laws of Hawaii 2024, which amended the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, takes effect on either the date of the Secretary of the Interior's notification letter, that Act 130 does not require congressional approval, or on the date that the United States Congress approval becomes law.

First up, we have testimony from the Department of Hawaiian Homelands.

Good afternoon. This particular Bill just corrects a defect. This was actually passed and, you know, when we looked at it, the method in approval, especially at the federal level, was deficient and missing. So, this kind of lays out that process and corrects it.

Okay, thank you. We've received written testimony, support from Kanani Kupuniai and we have testimony and support from Ms. Cindy Freitas online. Ms. Freitas, please continue. Please proceed.

[Speaking Hawaiian]

Aloha.

I'm Cindy Freitas. I'm a native Hawaiian descendant prior to 1778. Born and raised in Hawaii. I'm also a cultural practitioner. I'm in support for HB 871.

This Acts increase the loan—limit for direct loans—provided by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands to 75% of the minimum single resident loan amount allowed in Hawaii, by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, which is the HUD.

Federal Housing Administration, FHA—this is a change from the current limit of 50%, as outlining in Section 215 of the Hawaiian Home Act of 1920, as amended.

By increasing the loan limit to 75%, the Act aims to provide greater financial support to Native Hawaiians seeking to build or improve homes on Hawaiian homeland, allowing them to access larger loans that align more closely with the FHA standards for single residential loan. This is a good program. Thank you. Have a good day.

Mahalo. Anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 871? If not—yes.

You are already there.

Please. Go ahead. Come on up.

Angela Melody Young, testifying on behalf of ROAR CARES, in strong support. So, um.

What's the name of—that you're testifying on behalf of?

Rescue of Animal Rights, Community Advocacy, Research, Education Services. Roar like a lion's roar.

You're going to need to write this down and provide it to our great staff over at this table after your testimony. Please go ahead.

Fabulous. Okay, so, Act 130 increased the loan limit for direct loans provided by the DHHL, which increases financial opportunities for Hawaiian homes.

So, we see that this affects the United States Housing and Urban Development Standards and the Federal Housing Administration, because we're talking about mortgages and down payments, federal subsidies, and federal guidelines for how Housing and Development operates. So, the purpose of this Act today is to confirm that the Act from last year wasn't sufficient enough.

So now, they're gonna cross out that it doesn't need congressional approval, and it just needs something from the Secretary of the Interior. So, I just wanna comment, on a side note, that it's kind of an inefficient process.

And I think that this could be a common goal for the Hawaiian homes and the Housing and Development Industry, as well as the legislative process, for a resolution to create a task force of the primary agencies working together to build out Hawaiian homes, so that everyone can read, like, a list of responsibilities.

And upon the responsibilities will be all the financial programs from the federal and the state level, as well as what the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act does and everything else. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Please. You're next.

Okay. I'm Kimmer Nahonu Horson Big Horse. Greetings, again. I support this Bill because—I just want to remind everybody the United Nations Declarations of Indigenous Rights reads that, "Any breach or contravention of indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands, territories, due to belligerent military occupation." That's the first, Article 10.

And then the next article is Article 12. They have a right to manifest, practice, develop, teach their spiritual custom ceremonies; maintain, protect and have access to their cultural sites, oceans, islands, and territories.

Again, this Bill helps that. The last, Article 25, states that, any breach, contravention, that Hawaiians, Kānaka Maoli, and any tribal nations have, that they have the right to maintain and strengthen their social, cultural, and spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied lands, territories, waters, and coastal seas, to uphold their future responsibilities to the seventh generation, their children and posterity.

I just want to reiterate that for this Bill. It doesn't need any kind of United States interference or invasion. It's already had enough. It's already breaching international law and violating it, and I just want to reiterate, that's an illegal, belligerent military occupation here. And we just need to start doing—what's it called—repentance, right? Or restoration? Mahalo.

Mahalo. Anyone else wishing to testify in this measure? If not, questions, Members? Seeing none. Thank you very much, testifiers and Members. Let's move on to the final measure on our agenda. House Bill 1090, relating to county user fees.

This measure exempts the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands from county user fees in the amount of $100,000 aggregate per year and insures county services to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands for Hawaiian home lands. First up, we have the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.

Good afternoon. This particular bill actually puts a cap on it rather than accumulated or aggregate. So in other words the counties can't charge us any more than 100,000. So I just wanted to clarify that. And then it really relates to the charges or user fees to create and maintain any stormwater management system or infrastructure.

And on another section it talks about exempting us or putting a cap at 100,000 for rates relative to water usage supplied as well as the use of sewers. And so those types of fees again this bill really puts a ceiling on a cap. That's all that maximum they can charge us annually, 100,000.

Thank you. So the summary is incorrect. Okay, thanks. Next we have testimony in opposition from the Board of Water Supply.

Mr. Lau, welcome. Please proceed.

Aloha mai kakou. Ernie Lau, Board of Water Supply. I manage the Honolulu border water supply which is responsible to provide service to almost a million people every day on the island of Oahu, including the Hawaiian home lands homesteads island wide. I just want to make sure I'm clear too.

For border water supply, when Chair Watson builds it to our water system standards of the BWS. Our inspectors go out and inspect it thereafter with a license we'll operate and maintain and eventually when it's necessary, replace that infrastructure so it becomes like we treat it like everything else that we build and operate.

And because border water supply we're financially self-sufficient. We depend on people paying their water bills to pay for the operation of this island wide water system and also the capital program to improve it and renew it over time to keep the system operating.

So it's basically our user fees, our water rates and charges pay for the operation of the border water supply system. For us, our mission is to provide safe, dependable and affordable water now and into the future for our community. And it's a tremendous challenge of maintaining this island wide infrastructure while still maintaining affordability, especially for our customers.

We have residential customers including kupuna. We serve not only the homesteads, but many of our customers are also Kanaka Maoli. But we treat everybody the same and fairly. So this bill provides a cap of no more than $100,000 that we can charge Hawaiian Home Lands.

It's a little unclear whether it means also the individual homesteaders have water meters that are paying water bills. I can't speak to the sewer charges or the stormwater charges.

But basically this becomes a massive unfunded mandate that is transferring the cost burden to operate this water system island wide and also improve it over time through our capital program, transfers it really from Hawaiian Home Lands to the rest of our customers. So I already struggle with the issues of affordability, especially for our kupuna that have limited incomes.

And we want to keep our water rates affordable so that they can access clean drinking water and still be able to pay it within their fixed incomes. So this is really, I think, quite unfair to the rest of our customers.

I speak on behalf of all the other customers in our water system that are going to have to foot the bill for this. Mahalo.

I just want to also clarify to you. Chair Watson and I go back over 20 years from when I was the manager of the Kauai Department of. Water.

So I kind of feel that for me and for the Board of Water Supply, we work very well with the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. We take responsibility for the infrastructure. They build it, and if they want us to operate and maintain it, we do that.

But we do need to generate the revenue to be able to pay for that. Mahalo.

Certainly. Thank you very much. Next, we have testimony from Tom Yamachika, Tax Foundation of Hawaii. Please proceed.

Thank you Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation of Hawaii. We have concerns about this bill that it is an unfunded mandate, as Engineer Lau stated. We basically echo his concerns and we'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you. That's all the testimony that we have received. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in House Bill 1090? If not, questions, Members? Representative Garcia.

Thank you Chair. For Director Watson, so the bill is really a cap at $100,000, so no more than that. Do you have figures of in the last few years, what's the average cost to the Department per year right now that you folks are paying for stormwater fees and sewage fees?

Yeah, we're going to have to get that information. Apologize.

Well above 100,000, though?

I would say so.

Other questions, Members? Vice Chair? After Vice Chair, I have some questions. Go ahead, Vice Chair.

This seems like something the counties would be able to implement themselves if they had the will to without the legislation. So I'm curious if there have been discussions with the respective counties on an effort like this.

Well, I'd have to, you know, kind of point out the fact that a lot of the beneficiaries that we're talking about here are low income or moderate income. In fact one of the nice things about here in Hawaii, excuse me, on Oahu, the city council, I believe, passed a law whereby for affordable housing projects and they had a ceiling of so much money that the developers could go in and ask for a waiver on the sewer connection fees, which is significant if you're a developer.

And for developments that we're doing, it's kind of key to, if you can kind of eliminate that, if you can eliminate plan review as well as, you know, create the density and approach it in a way that is more cost effective. This is just part of it.

But that is an example where the county, the city council took it on themselves to provide a kind of like a subsidy by this waiver for affordable housing projects. And I'd have to say almost all of our projects are affordable housing projects.

And therefore for you to pass this particular law kind of indirectly takes and replaces the approach that the city council for Honolulu has done in making these subsidies. By doing it statewide, it also mandates the other counties to follow suit, to put a ceiling on it.

But more importantly, it's the excess part, the fees that not only the existing homesteaders are charged with, but also as we move forward on developing projects, if we can get that eliminated, those fees, the sewer connection fees, as well as ongoing charges that I believe our homesteaders are subject to presently, it not only allows the construction of more viable and cost effective projects, but more importantly for beneficiaries that have to pay these fees to allow them to--

Like you mentioned, Kupuna. We got a lot of Kupunas out there that that fee, as well as paying for electricity, paying for water is significant, especially if you're on a limited income. So I'd ask you folks to consider that when you talk about this, make it across the state.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Other questions? Representative Shimizu.

I just want to clarify the bill is $100,000 cap per county. Okay, so in the case of like Board of Water Supply, which may not fall under the county, if you look at it a certain way, they would be outside of this $100,000 cap.

I don't think so. The way it's written, it talks about the county and I believe the, you know, while it's independent from administration, all that, I believe it falls within the county mandate.

Okay, so you're talking about not county as an entity, but county as a geographic region.

Right, exactly.

Oh, so that would also include Hawaiian Electric, things like that also.

Well, Hawaiian Electric, that's a private entity, wouldn't be a county.

Okay. And how would you calculate this with your individual users? You would manage it monthly and summarize that to get to that 100,000 figure or--

We'd figure out a way. We'd figure out a way.

All right, thank you. Thank you, Chair.

A question also for Chair. The words in the bill say, 'provided further that no county shall charge or collect user fees from the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands in excess of 100,000 in the aggregate per year, provided further that no services shall be denied to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands.'

So it's the county charging or collecting user fees. So it's the county.

Right. I don't know. Maybe Ernie can--

So, no. So first, my question to you is, how much would you save if this bill were passed? How much in excess of $100,000 do you pay per county?

Yeah, that's what we have to find out and figure out. We'll get that information to you.

Okay. Because that's critical. And then I'd like to know what user fees this would apply to. What are those-- What does that mean?

Well, when you look at that item covering on page 11 on the bottom, 'collect rates for water supply to consumers and use of sewers.' So I'm assuming that collect rates, you know, the fees that they charge regarding, you know, so much water usage.

And I guess in some of the billings, they kind of combine the two, the sewer fees along with the water charges, at least here in the city and county of Honolulu. So those rates, to me, reflects fees that are being charged to the consumers.

That's not a definition of user fees.

Well, that user fees goes through the-- On page three, which is different from the section on page 11. That one, you're right, it's user fees, other one is rates for water supply.

On page 11, yes, it starts out saying, 'collect rates for water supply to consumers and for the use of sewers;' then you put in the words, 'provided that no county shall charge against or collect user fees.' So again, you're back to user fees, which is different from water rates.

It's in the same paragraph, I understand. There's a semicolon there. And so it's just unclear to me what user fees really mean.

But if you look in the items, the paragraph numbers, like that one you're talking about is paragraph 23, which on the top, it basically says, 'establish and maintain water works and sewer works.' And then that's part of a subsection that gets into the fees that are charged and rates. Which is different from the other section.

So I think for this Committee, I would like to get very clear on what are these user fees in each county because you've got homestead that are in areas that don't have sewer fees and in fact you've got some places like Kailapa that they're not paying the county Department of Water Supply for their water.

Yeah. So there's no fees that this would apply to.

So, it would be important for this Committee, and certainly if this moves on to Finance, for them to know how much are you paying in each county in user fees? That would-- so that we would know that if this were to pass--

And I want to understand clearly what user fees mean. You know, does it apply to the Board of Water Supply here in city and county Honolulu, or not? And it's just-- and then I think Vice Chair's question is very relevant, have you asked the individual counties for relief from county charged fees?

Because I think they could do this on their own. I know you want it statewide, but each county could do this on their own. And I would like to know whether or not you've asked them.

We're working with the different counties more actually to help them go after federal funds to fix their various systems that are deficient. One on Kauai we're looking at--

But you haven't asked them for putting a cap on the user fees to the individual counties.

No, we haven't. We haven't. This is something we--

This might surprise them that you're asking to do this. We didn't get any testimony from any of the county administrations. Mr. Lau came in here because he's got a very good team that monitors legislation.

He's pretty diligent, this guy, I got to say.

Very. I bet the other counties don't know that this is here. I wouldn't assume that their silence is tacit consent.

You're probably right.

So I don't like to surprise the counties by taking away things that we've provided to them under the Constitution.

And so what I would-- what I'm inclined to do to recommend to the Committee is to defer this measure until next week so that you could go back and do this work to get that information that we are requesting from you. And I think you should consult with the counties. I mean this is--

I think that sounds fair. We'll do that.

Okay. Any other questions? Second time around, Mr. Shimizu.

Thank you, Chair. Just wanted to comment that Director Watson, I support DHHL and the efforts to cut costs. And my line of questioning is just to clarify my understanding of the bill.

Okay, any other questions, Members? If not, thank you very much to all the testifiers here and online. Okay, so, Members, let's go ahead and go back to the top of the agenda for decision making. Okay. First up, House Bill 410 relating to the budget of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

I recommend we move this out with a House Draft 1 with technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency and style. And I would like to defect the effective date to July 1, 3000 to continue discussion on this. That's at the request of Finance Committee. And with those amendments, if we pass it, it would move on to Finance Members.

Questions or concerns. If not, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 410 with amendments. [Roll Call] Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next. Certainly mahalo for your good work. Next, let's look at House Bill 304 relating to the Hawaiian language. On this measure, I would like to incorporate the recommendation recommended amendments from the Attorney General and defect the effective date to July 1st, 3000.

The reason why I want to adopt the Attorney General's amendments is because with every other law that we do, if we amend it, then it's the newly amended version that is applied. And I think that's important.

But when one does the legislative history on any measure, you do look back at in the history of the Bill, of the language of the law. And so you would need to look at the original Hawaiian language version, if that's where it started. But I think the Attorney General's recommendation is valid and that's what I would recommend.

Questions or concerns, Members? If not Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 304 with amendments, noting Representative Hashem as present and represent Representatives Cochran and Todd as excused. Voting on House Bill 304 with amendments. Are there any no's or reservations? Okay. Recommendation adopted.

Thank you. Next, House Bill 603 relating to native Hawaiian business marketing. On this measure, I would like to make some technical amendments. There's an incorrect cross reference on page two, line eight. It should be to subsection C, not subsection B.

I would also like to make amendments to here to make sure that we are applying to all Hawaiians, regardless of blood quantum.

I would also like to adopt the Office of Hawaiian Affairs requested amendment that rather than requiring OHA to administer and oversee a program, that rather they convene a working group to engage with relevant stakeholders about program design, implementation and long term viability of such a program.

And I would like to delete the appropriation and put the amount into the Standing Committee report and change the effective date to July 1st, 3000 for continued discussion. This is going to go on to Consumer Protection and Commerce Committee and to Finance Committee.

I think it's okay that we defect the effective date and do what's necessary so this can move on to Finance. But Consumer Protection and Commerce will have to look at this as well. Office of Hawaiian affairs, you can, if you need to make additional amendments, you can work with Consumer Protection Commerce to do that next.

It's a triple referral. We're trying to move it out quickly so that we would have the CPC would have the opportunity to hear it in their Committee. Okay. Yep. Any questions or concerns, Members?

Just clarify.

Representative Peruso.

Sorry, just clarifying for the public. When you say delete appropriation, you just mean blanking out the amount.

Yeah, I'm blanking out. Yeah. Thank you. I'm blanking out the appropriation amount. It still says blank is appropriated. So thanks for that clarification. Yeah, blank out the appropriation, put the appropriation, request the amount of 350,000 into the standing Committee report. Questions or concerns, Members? If not Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 603 with amendments. Representatives Cochran and Todd are excused. All other Members are present. Are there any noes or reservations hearing? None. Recommendation adopted.

Thank you. Next, House Bill 1091 relating to sewer transmission lines. My recommendation is to move this out with amendments. We need to make some technical amendments for clarity, consistency and style. I think a way for us to deal with the title issue is to change the words other sewerage facilities to related sewerage facilities.

I think we might be in compliance if we do it that way. So that's my recommendation to change where it says other sewerage facilities. We would actually change it to related sewerage facilities. And I think that should be sufficient to keep this in compliance. We'll keep it the effective date as it is. So that's my recommendation.

Questions or concerns, Members?

Good. I like that.

Okay, thank you. Thanks for the affirmation. Other questions or concerns, Members? If not Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 1091 with amendments. Representatives Cochran and Todd are excused. All of their Members are present. Are there any notes or reservations? Okay. Hearing none. Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next. House Bill 1239 related to independent legal counsel. I would like to continue this. Move this bill out for continued discussion. I appreciate the Attorney General's concern. They've been consistent in bringing up these concerns. But I would like to move this out. I'd like to defect the effective date to July 1st, 3000.

I would like to put into the Standing Committee report note the Attorney General's concerns about the state paying for outside counsel. And I ask the Finance Committee to address this. It may be that they would want the Department to pay for it out of trust funds.

That would be something I think the Finance Committee has in their jurisdiction to consider. But I would like to move this bill on for their consideration. So defect the effective date to July 1, 3000.

And just note in the Standing Committee report the Attorney General's concern about the state paying for outside counsel and ask the Finance Committee to address that. That's my recommendation. Questions or concerns Members? If not Vice Chair for the Vote.

Voting on House Bill 1239 with amendments. Representatives Cochran and Todd are excused. All of their Members are present. Are there any no's or reservations? Hearing None. Recommendation adopted.

Thank you. Next bill. House Bill 1351 relating to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act 1920, as amended. I would like to do something similar on this one.

Move this out with a defective effective date, which would be July 1, 3000, and put into the Standing Committee report a note about the concerns from the Department of Budget and Finance concerning increase in the state's liability. And ask the Finance Committee to address this issue because that is in their Kuleana questions or concerns.

Members, if not Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 1351 with amendments. Representatives Cochran and Todd are excused. All other Members are present. Are there any no's or reservations? Hearing None. Recommendation adopted.

Thank you. On House Bill 1362 relating to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands, this has to do with appropriating funds to expand the sewer network and lines within and throughout the Keaukaha Homestead. I would like to move this out with a defective effective date, 7-1-3000. I would like to amend the first page because it's not quite accurate.

On line seven where it says cesspools in this area are priority level one. I'd like to say cesspools near ocean waters are usually designated priority level one so that it deals with the issue that if you actually look at The Hawaii Cesspool Prioritization Tool.

This area is within priority level two, but there's a, uh, Hilo study saying it should be priority level one. So without getting into all that, I think my amendment deals with it. So it would read on line seven. Cesspools near ocean waters are usually designated priority level one, et cetera.

I'd like to delete the appropriation amount, but put into the standing. Excuse me. I want to blank out the appropriation amount and put into the standing Committee report that the Department of Hawaiian Homelands is requesting $8 million for this purpose. Those are my recommendations, questions or concerns Members, if not Vice Chair for the.

Vote, voting on House Bill 1362 with amendments, Representatives Cochran and Todd are excused. All of their Members are present. Are there any no's or reservations? Hearing? None. Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. House Bill 1457. I've got a lot of questions about this, but I noticed that the sponsor is a Member of the Finance Committee. I am reluctant to authorize Hawaiian Homes Commission to do anything with property taxes since that's what we. That's the authority we've specifically given to the counties. I would.

Because you haven't done this before, I would like to amend this so that it authorizes the Department of Hawaiian Homelands to apply to the counties for tax increment financing so that you would be following the existing county ordinance process.

I'd like to defect the effective date to July 1st, 3000 and then put into the Standing Committee report the Attorney General's concerns and ask the Finance Committee to address them. Because the tax issue is specifically in the kuleana of the Finance Committee. That's my recommendation, questions or concerns Members? If not Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 1457 with amendments, Representatives Cochran and Todd are excused and all other Members are present. Any nos or reservations?

No vote.

No vote from Representative Garcia. Any additional nos or reservations? Okay. Hearing None. Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, House. Moving on to House Bill 871 relating to Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. This is a bill that fixes flaw in a previous bill. I think it makes sense to move forward. But to expedite matters and encourage further discussion, I would like to defect the effective date to July 1st, 3000 and move it on to finance.

Questions or concerns Members? If not Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 871 with amendments, Representatives Cochran and Todd are excused. All other Members are present. Are there any notes or reservations? Hearing None. Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Final measure, House Bill 1090. I've still got a lot of questions which I brought up in our discussion. So I would like to defer this measure to February 5th and request the department provide the information requested to us so that we can make decision based on good information. That's my recommendation.

Any questions or concerns about my recommendation to defer? If not, thank you very much, Members and all testifiers, there being no further business before the Judiciary Hawaiian Affairs Committee, we are adjourned.