House Standing Committee on Health

Good morning. We are. It's Thursday, January 30th, 2025 at 9:30am in Conference Room 329 at the State Capitol. We're here for a joint hearing with the Human Services and Health Committees. And I have, my name is Lisa Martin. I have Chair Takayama here for the Health Committee. We have also Rep. Ikaika Olds, Rep. Keohokapu-Lee Loy, Rep.

Takenouchi, Rep. Amato and Rep. Alcos in attendance. And our one item on the agenda is HB 1131 relating to an intensive mobile team pilot program for houseless individuals suffering from serious brain disorders.

It establishes a pilot program, the Department of Health, to provide intensive mobile treatment type services called street psychiatry to chronically houseless people suffering from serious brain disorders like schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. And we have on the agenda to testify today. First let me find the right one. The Hawaii State Department of Health, behavioral administration. Dr. Koyanagi.

Good morning, chairs and vice chairs of these committees. Chad Koyanagi, Department of Health, Adult Mental Health Division. We strongly support this bill, stand on our written testimony. I'll be here for questions.

Thank you very much. That is the only one we had signed up to speak in person. We also have in support in writing the Hawaii Primary Care Association, Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center, Hawaii Substance Abuse Coalition, Hawaii Medical Association and two individuals. Is there anyone else present who wishes to testify on this measure?

Members, are there any questions for our testifier? Seeing none. I have questions. Thank you, Dr. Koyanagi. Okay, so I just wanted to follow up. I note that it's a very intensive program for that pretty significant staff, just 40 participants. And in discussion you said that if somebody moves on, you would replace that participant in the program. So over the two year period it may serve more than 40 people.

Yes. So one of the features of the IMT program we're basing it or the inspiration of this pilot project is the IMT model which is being currently run in New York City. And one of the features that contributes to its success is the low caseload.

It's similar to what we used to, what we call assertive community treatment, AC ACT teams, which we had a couple of decades ago based on low caseload, multidisciplinary teams, teams able to go out into the field, 247 mobile psychiatrists.

And so it depends on following these folks who are high utilizers as they bounce between cell block, hospital, ER, community concern, Hawaii State Hospital. And so generally the patients stay on the team regardless of what, whether they're in jail or hospital.

I suppose if people were locked up for an extended period of time, we may put a pause on their care and service another member of the community.

Okay. Would you have an objection? If currently, the way it's written, it puts 40 as a maximum number of participants, could we say at least 40 to give you the flexibility? If you had a number of clients that were, for example, locked up somewhere and decided to expand your caseload, that wouldn't be pressuring you. It would just be giving you the flexibility.

A little bit of wiggle room upwards to have people in the queue might be helpful, but having the ceiling be too high would dilute the efficiency.

I won't put a ceiling. I'll just say at least 40. Okay. Instead of. I think you just. You said 40.

Yes.

Okay. And then my other question is, how will this project coordinate with existing services like the Iwilei Behavioral Health Crisis Center or other like mobile medical teams like CORE that might be operating in the area? Will there be any coordination or.

Yes. So based on the intensity of this team, we will. The team will be available 247. And so even after hours, we'll be responding to police, ERs, hospitals. We will collaborate with existing resources to assist with housing, specialized treatment, like dual diagnosis treatment.

Other case management teams might have some reason to collaborate with us in helping these individuals. So we're ultimately responsible for the care of these people and we'll use existing resources. But ultimately we will have to find places for these people to go and treatment venues for them to receive care.

Okay, thank you. And my last question is, is this in the Governor's Budget? Do you know.

Hi. Joy Kobayashi, Department of Health. It is in that it is part of the governor's package, but it is not being added as a budget ad in like the form a sense.

Okay. Okay. So, yeah, that means no. Thank you very much. Okay. I appreciate your help. Thank you. Members, are there any questions that occurred to you since I last asked? No. Okay, then maybe we'll go right into decision making. So I'm recommending that this measure be passed, defecting the date to July 1st, 3000, blanking out the appropriations.

And on page one, line 15, change the language to at least 40 participants just to keep that flexible. Members, are there any questions or comments? Seeing none. Vice chair for the vote, please.

Voting in on HB 1131. The chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. [ROLL CALL] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Same recommendation for Committee on Health. Any comments, questions? If not, vice chair for the vote.

Thank you, chair. Voting on HB 1131, chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. [ROLL CALL] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Good morning. Reconvening for the 9:35 hearing. Thursday, January 30th in Conference Room 329 with the Human Services and Homelessness Committee and. All right.

Thank you very much. And this meeting is adjourned. We're going to adjourn and then we'll just come right back for the next one.

Alright. And our first measure this morning is HB1140 relating to homeless encampments on Department of Land and Natural Resources lands. Appropriates funds for them to clean up after the homeless encampments. And we have here a single testifier in person, the Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Aloha, Chair Marten, Vice Chair Olds and Committee Members. I'm Pua Aiu from the Department of Land and Natural Resources. I'm the homeless coordinator for the department. This bill will allow us to continue cleaning up homeless across the state.

We do about 22-24 cleanups per year and it'll allow us to look at homelessness on scale across the whole department. So it's very important to us. I'll stand on the rest of the testimony which gives you information about statistics mostly. But if you have questions, I'll be here. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Members, are there any questions or of our testify? Okay, Chair Amato.

Thank you Chair. Quick question. I just want to ensure that these funds will not be used for sweeping homeless of areas and that they will only be used for cleaning up after the area no longer has occupants. Is that correct?

So the way we do it, and this is the state policy, we provide notice to all of the people telling them that they're trespassing on our lands and aren't allowed. And so they're- they are given 48 hours at least.

Usually we give about a week to remove themselves from the property and then we clean up whatever is left behind. There's a policy on if they have personal things left behind for storage. So we've been very consistent about following that policy.

Quick follow up. So what is the procedure if there are still people there when you go to clean- when DLNR goes to clean up a site.

They have to leave the property.

Will they be arrested or-

No.

What's procedure?

No, we just tell them to. Technically, they move to the county section, which is across the road.

Okay.

Yeah.

Thank you.

I have one more question. Is this in the Governor's budget?

This is not. It's in his legislative package, but not in the budget.

Okay. Thank you very much. Members, any other questions? Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Moving on to our next measure, HB1486, relating to public order.

It makes it disorderly conduct, offense to remain or loiter within 20ft of a bus stop with no intent to utilize any bus services. And we have in person the Office of the Public Defender.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is William Bento. I'm a Member of the Office of the Public Defender. Our office does oppose this bill, but before I get into some of that, I just want to say that we certainly understand why the bill was put forward.

We understand the frustration that people in the community feel, especially when they go to a bus stop and want to utilize one. However, our- our position is that the criminal justice system is really not geared towards being able to address this problem and this- this issue. What would happen in these circumstances?

The individual would be approached, questioned, perhaps arrested, charged, brought to court.

If it's a Friday, they're going to stay over the weekend in- in prison waiting to see a judge on Monday simply because they may have fallen asleep at a bus stop or occupied a bus stop because they had no other choice or really didn't intend to use the bus.

I've outlined in our testimony some constitutional concerns we have regarding the questioning of those individuals. And- And just the idea that, you know, someone who may be waiting for the bus and just falls asleep and then to be awakened by a police officer in question can be kind of jarring for- for someone, you know.

I don't want the committee to think that our office doesn't help and address these issues for clients that we already have, because we spend a tremendous amount of time trying to get clients into services, but adding to that would be very difficult.

So we feel that this is an issue that's better addressed outside of the criminal justice system. And I'm certainly willing to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Bento. Then on Zoom, do we have HPD? Please go ahead.

Yes, ma'am. Good morning, Chair Marten, Vice Chair Olds, Members of the Committee, Major Randall Platt with HPD. We stand on our written testimony in support of House Bill 1486. I'll be available for questions.

Thank you very much. We have also. Okay, we have somebody in person here, an individual, Betty Kawamura. Please come up.

Hi, good morning. Thank you very much for this opportunity to testify. My name is Betsy Kawamura and I was asked by Ikaika Olds to provide testimony.

So can you say if you're testifying in support or in opposition?

Support, yes. And my name is Betsy Kawamura. And first and foremost, I'd like to say that I myself was homeless before. So I'm coming from the perspective of seeing both sides is my experience as being homeless before. I recently moved back from outside the States to Hawaii about two years ago, and I live on the intersection of.

I live close to Don Quijote on the other side in Kalakaua, and my address is 1617 Kalakaua Avenue. And since I've moved into my place about two years ago, we've been noticing a tremendous amount of stress and upheaval on the bus stops right in front of my building as well as right across in 1649.

These two are bus stops that basically have a lot of problems with the homeless, basically either squatting or staying overnight. As the previous gentleman had explained. The reason why I'm in support of this bill is that we, as private residences in this area with tiny businesses, we don't have the resources to have building maintenance facilities.

You know, on property management 24/7. We're in, you know, we're in the tiny area where a lot of us are middle or lower than average middle income, where HOAs cannot afford to support to have the cleaning and maintenance.

Thus, we're finding ourselves especially the small businesses having to clean up after the debris after the homeless who basically squat on the bus stops or basically overnight. And this includes, unfortunately, human excrement as they tend to use our areas as latrines. I have brought this subject up to the neighborhood board several times with Ikaika Olds, Ian Ross.

Scott Nishimoto is familiar when he was a state representative and also had brought this situation up with Ed Case. So this is an ongoing thing that we have been trying to struggle with for the past one or two years as HOA increases and building maintenance costs increase.

We find that it is a very unfair burden that we as private residences and tiny businesses who are struggling to keep ourselves alive to have to come after and provide our expenses and our daily efforts to clean up after the homeless.

Now, we have consistently called CORE and the HPD, but obviously CORE cannot come immediately and they cannot provide the services if the people do not want to be under CORE's care. HPD as far as I understand after several discussions, find it very difficult to do anything because they said that their hands are tied.

This is repeated messages to us that HPD is very interested in assisting, but they say that until now their hands are very tied and they can't do much. And this has been the situation when Calvin Tse was the Council Member for our area. So, you know. And then also, this also extends to the bus ridership.

If bus- if public transportation is really encouraged in the State of Hawaii, I think it's very important to understand that we and I ride the bus because I don't have a car, because I'm trying to do something about collected transport that I myself and my colleagues as bus riders, we need to have like a atmosphere that's very pleasant for taking the bus.

Obviously, taking the bus to collected transport is going to make it easier to reduce carbon emissions. And basically we're looking at the wildfire situations in Los Angeles and everywhere. So this is a really concern also for bus ridership. So we would like to really ask for your help in this.

And our- myself and a few of us, including Ikaika and everything, also assisted with the- with the problematic intersection of Kalakaua and South King by Jack in the Box where we basically-

Can I ask you to summarize?

So we are, I myself, where our colleagues are in support of this bill, which is going to make it easier to keep the cleanliness and the bus riderships of the bus stops and to make it easier for HPD and CORE and other institutions to try to cleanse the area, keeping consideration that this might also catalyze the homeless to receive the aid that they so really need.

Yes.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you for coming to testify in person. Next up, we have written support from City and County of Honolulu Mayor's office. Two individuals in support and one individual in opposition. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Members, are there any questions for our testifiers?

The Office of Public Defenders. So good morning. I just want to say thank you for what you do. So before I was elected, I actually was on the other side with my clients being represented by this fine office. So my question for you is, you had cited.

I completely understand how the the judicial system is not the answer to solve homelessness. I think we all collectively understand that. But you did mention the risk of people being arrested by falling asleep at a bus stop. And I'm assuming that's everyday normal people.

Do you know how many people have been arrested at a bus stop previously when the city had the ordinance that you couldn't sleep there? Do you have that information?

No, I don't. We don't keep those statistics. We, you know, we take each case individually as it comes in. We keep numbers of the amount of cases, but not the specific case.

Based off of your own professional experience in the office, do you think there was a lot of cases of people getting arrested everyday, normal citizens getting arrested? Sleeping at bus stops?

I haven't seen those cases.

Yeah, so just to kind of run in. So there's other ordinances that prevent you from sleeping out in public.

Yes, there are. I mean, I will say this. You know, the sit-lie ban, we see a lot of those cases and they do take up a lot of the resources, you know, of the office and our district court level, as well as within the court system. Because.

And- And what my fear is, this type of bill can lead to that where it's just a cycle. Yeah. Guys get arrested for sit-lie, they go in for a day, come back out, get arrested again, and they, you know, get numerous amounts of these, of these cases. And I think that's the possibility with this similar situation.

Because I think the problem is when they get into the system, the criminal justice system, there's a belief or a hope that people are going to be jarred into asking for help or they're going to be provided with that help. Although we try to hook people up with services and stuff like that.

When you're in custody two or three days and if you were a prosecutor before, you would know, right, people are in custody two or three days, all they want to do is get out. And so if they change their plea, they get out, the judge can't attach services to their sentence or force them into services.

So it just becomes this cycle over and over again. And that's one of our concerns in regards to this type of case. And I agree with you. I think, you know, I- I trust HPD in a sense that they're not going to just arrest everybody who falls asleep at a bus stop.

But, you know, there's always that situation where just the fact that you may be waiting for the bus and you fall asleep and then you're jarred awake by HPD.

But maybe that person may have some other issues, right? And that can lead to confrontation, argument, and next thing you know, the person's arrested and now charged with assault or something like that.

These are the kinds of things that we see, and maybe they're in a minority, but they do add to all of the work that we have to do as well. And we're not saying we're trying to get out of our work.

We're just saying that there are a lot of situations where people don't have to be placed into the criminal justice system.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I have a question for HPD on Zoom, if you're still there, Randall.

Yes, ma'am. Still here.

So this doesn't. I know that you folks currently, when dealing with homeless with mental health problems, etc. It's mostly complaint driven that you would respond to something. Is that accurate or would you?

Generally speaking, yes. But again, if officers on patrol see something, they can take action as well.

Right. Is- I- I personally, there is a bus stop in Kailua right outside Castle Hospital in my- in my town that it is actually very heartbreaking when people come out of the psychiatric ward, they will make it as far as a bus stop and take over.

And you see all the staff coming off the night shift, you know, at 6am and the bus stop is not usable because it has been taken over. So I definitely see where this would be important in some instances, in some locations, in some instances.

I wouldn't want to add to the burden for you folks or for the public defender's office to be processing revolving door cases with no real beneficial outcome. Would this kind of charge be something that could lead to building a case for ACT for assisted community treatment, for basically involuntary treatment of mental health problems? These types of charges?

I think- I think that's.

Yeah. So would these charges be part of building a case for getting someone on assisted community treatment?

I would say that's possible. You'd have to look at them and what their requirements are. But I think for us it would be documentation of the incident that the person is at the bus stop. Our- Our typical approach is to offer services first and if the person remains or refuses services, that we at least document that.

If it leads to a citation or arrest, that's all part of the police report. Those can later be accessed and used to- for ACT or I mean, further down the line to send somebody in.

Okay, thank you very much. Any other questions? Go ahead.

A follow up question to Major Platt. Thank you so much.

This bill also covers our neighbor islands and I was just wondering if you had any information from our community policing officers on Kauai, Hawaii Island or Maui and have had any discussions on how this bill helps everybody kind of do their job and get individuals into the right services?

Ma'am? No, I'm sorry, I haven't had any discussions with the other counties.

Yeah, and I'll have staff follow up. And same question for our public defender's office, Hawaii Island we're really struggling public defender's office and our jail is packed. Any information from our neighbor islands on how this bill kind of has a circle of impact for the work that's out there?

I'm sorry, ma'am, I didn't contact our office in Hilo or in Kona to ask, but I know that they are both on both sides of the island, very burdened with numerous cases. Yeah. So they have much more work than they have the ability to handle. So.

Great. Thank you. Appreciate that.

Thank you. Rep. Takenouchi.

Oh, sorry, public defender. Sorry. Thank you. In your testimony, also, there's some of this. I was. How do I phrase this question, this issue that you raise about, I guess, intent. Right. Because it. The police officer is going to have to kind of establish intent because of this language about utilizing bus services.

And so you said that they're not going to be able to kind of ask the individual what they're doing. So how- how is that some of the problem that we're going to see?

Because HPD is going to have- or whatever police force is going to have to just kind of guess on the intention of the person, and that's going to lead to some of the cycling.

Is that the concern, or can you speak more about how what HPD is allowed to do or ask in their assertation of what the intent of something is? I guess I'm a little unclear about how that works.

And I- I think that with the major and the prosecutor's office, if they were here, we'd probably have a little discussion and disagreement about that, in a sense. But, you know, whenever a police officer believes somebody is perhaps committing a crime and they're suspecting that this person is a suspect in. In a case.

So the situation where somebody is occupying the bus stop, perhaps sleeping there, lying there, has property there and gives the appearance as though this person may be homeless, for lack of any better term, and is not going to be catching the bus, they will have to, in order to make an arrest, have to figure out whether that person really is waiting for the bus or not.

And really the only way is to ask that question of the person. But if they suspect this person is committing an offense, to then ask them to give evidence against themselves by saying, are you waiting for the bus or are you just sleeping here? Oh, I'm just sleeping here.

Okay, I'm going to arrest you now because you're violating this law. Brings into question whether that question was constitutional or not. Now, there is an issue dealing with whether that person was in custody or not. If a person is not in custody or deemed not in custody.

Usually these types of questions can be asked because the usual situation is you're in HPD arrested and they're trying to question you, and the so called Miranda Rights that you probably have all heard of are necessary at that point in time. But, you know, as a defense attorney, my concern has always been the erosion of those rights.

And so, you know, in a situation where if the person tried to get up and say, don't ask me questions, I'm leaving, if they were to let that person go, perhaps there's no issue. But if they were to say, no, you got to wait, answer my question, then perhaps we get into the issue of custody, and then that question without Miranda Rights could perhaps be unconstitutional.

Now, the reason why we put that and we brought that up is because this invites litigation. So you're taking a petty misdemeanor case that usually is resolved very quickly in court, and now perhaps there's a constitutional violation that we as attorneys must raise to the court. Okay.

And so now we're talking about a whole nother day in court for a simple situation like this. And so that, that's why, you know, we- we raised that and we had that concern.

Okay, thank you. And quick follow up. Quick follow up to HPD. Do you agree with- do you have anything to add about that kind of conversation, about how you guys would assess intent in this situation?

Yeah. So as he mentioned that we probably us, the prosecutors and the public defenders would have disagreement on the issue for us. We believe that the officers can have- conduct a field interrogation, and at which point we have to determine whether or not suspe- the person is a suspect or is violating the law. So we would ask those questions.

Right. If the person refuses to answer, gets up and leaves, then we don't have a violation because they're not remaining or loitering. Right. But if the person, through our. And the person is, because the person is free to leave, they're not in custody, so Miranda doesn't apply.

But as we conduct the field interrogation, we ask, we're entitled to ask those questions about, you know, hey, how's it going? Are you all right? Where are you going? Things like that. And then it's part of the field investigation. The officer then at some point has to make a decision based on his observations.

We may let it go the first time, come back, the person is still at the bus stop. Several buses have passed at that point. It's clear that he's not really. Or to our, in our view, that he's not utilizing the bus services. We may at that point, issue a citation. If it's an arrestable offense, we may arrest.

Those are options that the officer has. But- But, yeah, it would be a discussion amongst probably the three parties, the three organizations, HPD, the public defenders, and the prosecutors.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Officer, I have another question. What would happen to the person's property? Let's say they have a shopping cart full of stuff, something that you can't just put in the police vehicle easily. What would happen to the property?

Yeah, so I believe the law allows us to either take or not take, so I'm not sure how that would exactly work. Yeah, we'd have to figure out something for it.

A question for HPD. Sorry, everybody. I just want to ask. So I know with our neighbor islands, it's something different, and you're speaking just for the City and County of Honolulu.

In your experience, do officers nor- in these kinds of interactions normally just try to get the person move where they're sleeping at a bus stop, where they're sleeping in a park, where they're sleeping on the beach. Where these are all offenses.

At certain times, do they normally just try to get the person to move rather than simply just issuing a citation or arrest?

Right. Typically we try to get them to move. Yeah, so that the bus stop or whatever it is, the parks are free to be used by members of the public. In general, yes.

Thank you.

Any further questions? No. Clearly in topic of interest. Thank you very much. Okay, we are going to be moving on to our next measure 877, which is relating to encampments, prohibits the erection, placement, construction, or maintenance of an encampment within 100 feet of the property line of a K to 12 public or private school or school facility.

And first up, we have DLNR again. Thank you Pua.

Aloha, Pua Aiu. Department of Land and Natural Resources, will stand on our written testimony.

Thank you very much. Next we have, and that was in support, next we have in support in person the Hawaii DOE. Do we have DOE here? Nope, not here. Not present. But in support. We have comments from the Attorney General on Zoom. I'm sorry. Oh, in person. Even better. Thank you very much for coming.

Good morning Chair Martin, Vice Chair Olds, Members of the Committee. Anne Horiuchi, from the Department of the Attorney General. As we stated in our testimony, the Department has concerns about this Bill, and we're providing several comments on it.

First, the Bill requires that any person who violates new Section 2 be subject to immediate removal, but the Bill doesn't specify how the person is to be removed. So we suggest that to effectuate legislative intent, making a violation of Section 2A petty misdemeanor would allow for the person's arrest and immediate removal.

Also, the Bill states, I'm sorry, doesn't provide much guidance in terms of what happens to the property, the encampment itself. We suggest that the Bill provide more guidance regarding the removal of the encampment that also takes into account the due process rights of the individual found to have violated new section 2A.

And finally, we note that the Bill does not clarify whether the buffer zone applies only to public spaces. We suggest adding clear definitions to specify which types of land are included or excluded from the buffer zone. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and I'll remain available for questions.

Thank you very much. Next up, we have in person, oh no, that's it for this Bill. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, questions? Go ahead. Representative. Thank you.

Thank you. Chair. I just had a clarifying question for AG's office. Appreciate the clarity around the definitions, but I just want to be clear about what's contained in the Bill. It says K to 12 public or private, and just curious if charter schools are within that definition.

Yes, as I recall, within 302A, 101 public schools include both Department schools as well as public charter schools. Perfect.

Thank you so much. Thank you, Chair. Any other questions? Okay, come back. I have a question. Sorry. So, okay. So is there, I did want to clarify that it was public or private property, is there any issue on private property?

Assuming that the encampment is not the property owner, but somebody who is squatting there, is there any problem adding in private property?

I'm sorry, sorry. If the encampment is on private property, that is within the buffer zone.

Yeah. Yeah. So assuming people are squatting either on public property or on private property, it is not the homeowner. If a private property owner, if there's a private property owner immediately adjacent to the school that is camping there, is there any problem adding that in to clarify it as you recommended it be clarified?

Does it become a trespass like?

I suppose it could, and I don't want to veer too far off from our testimony.

And so this is a response to your testimony?

Yes well, I think what we could do, I mean, because, for instance, if, thinking off the top of my head, for example, if there's a private home that's within the buffer zone and the person erects a camp or is camping in their own backyard, then wouldn't that technically be an encampment? That's within the buffer zone of the school.

I think if it's done without the consent of the private owner, then again, maybe that is language that needs to be within.

So what language would you. I don't think that there will be an issue with people camping in their own yard and getting vested. I don't think that's a problem we're going to see. But what language would you suggest so that we can clarify? It may be private land. It may not be a home.

It may be empty vacant private land and there may be an encampment there. What, what would the, I was just going to. Would it be okay to just put on public or private property or would you suggest other language?

I apologize, I would need to confer with the office to provide you with specific maybe with specific suggested language and maybe we can work with your office on trying to provide something that you can.

All right. Thank you very much.

Any other questions, Members? Seeing none. We'll move on to our next measure, which is relating to child care. Establishes a child care classroom contracts pilot program to require the Department of Human Services to contract directly with child care center providers in licensed infant and toddler child care centers and group child care centers that meet certain criteria.

And first up, we have the Department of Human Services.

Good morning. Chair Martin, Vice Chair Olds, Members of the Committee, I'm Stacy Tonouchi with the Department of Human Services Child Care Subsidy Program, on behalf of Director Yamane. We stand on our written testimony and support and offer comments. Please let me know if you have questions and thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you very much for coming today.

Next we have the Executive Office of Early Learning with comments in person.

Hi, Yuuko Arikawa Cross, Director of the Executive Office on Early Learning. We stand on our written testimony with comments. Thank you very much.

Thank you for being here today, we also have Early Childhood Action Strategy in person in support.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members. I'm Vivian ETO with Early Childhood Action Strategy, we also stand on our written testimony in support of this measure and we'll be available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much, and next we have Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks in person.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair. Members of the Committee, my name is Chevelle Davis and I stand on our written testimony in support of this measure. And I'll be available for any questions. Malo.

Thank you very much. We have also written testimony in support from American Association of University Women and four individuals. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Members, any questions? Okay. I have a question for DHS. Did you get a chance to see the testimony of the HCAN testimony?

I did not have that opportunity.

Okay. They provided language, most of which was identical to what's already in the Bill, but the only thing that was different I just wanted to run by you before adopting it.

Is it said that the Department of Human Services shall monitor seat utilization and may adjust the number of contracted seats based on enrollment trends and provider performance, provided that providers with consistently low utilization of contracted seats may be subject to contract modification or termination. So that was the only thing that was different.

How does the Department feel about that?

Thank you for the opportunity for contracted slots, I believe we can be in support of that or under contract terms. That would be acceptable. Yes.

Yeah, that would be okay. Okay. Thank you very much.

Seeing no further questions, we'll move on to our next item. HB 880 relating to early childhood intervention requires Department of Human Resources Development to reclassify certain early intervention specialist positions, within the Early Childhood services unit in the Department of Health. Basically is upgrading them. And we have with comment the Department of Human Resources Development.

Good morning, chair, Vice Chair, and Members of the Committee. I'm Reynelle Yee from the Department of Human Resources Development, Employee Relations Division, on behalf of Brenna Hashimoto, our Director. We stand on our written testimony providing comments, and I'm available for questions. Thank you very much.

Next, we have in support the Department of Health. Okay, thank you. Next, we have Hawaiian Children's Action Network speaks in support, possibly in person or on zoom. Were you wanting to speak on that? Okay. And we have Early Childhood Action Strategy in support on zoom. Yep. Please go ahead.

Aloha and good morning. Thank you, chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members for today's hearing. My name is Jonathan Alexander, the Comprehensive System of Personnel Development Coordinator, Early Childhood Action Strategy. I would like to stand on my testimony and strong support of HB880. Mahalo for your time, and I'm available for any questions.

Thank you. We also have written support from Hawaii Early Intervention Coordinating Council, Waianae Coast Early Childhood Services, Parent Child Development Center, Wahiawa Waianae Coast Early Childhood Services, again, Hawaii Association for Infant Mental Health, and seven individuals in support. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, are there any questions?

I had a quick question for the, I believe it was the Department of Health. Yes so, for the Department of Health please. So your request to change was just to change the amount. Has the cost of the salary has gone up since a previous version of the Bill? Perhaps.

Hi, Chair. My name is Matt Shim. I'm chief of the Family Health Services, Hawaii State Department of Health. The change that we requested is, I think when the working group was putting together the information for the Bill, there were 10 positions. There's actually 11 positions. So if the,

if their salaries increase for 11, it would be 11 times. I see. $4,800 per year.

I see that. That's why they're different. Okay, thank you very much. Appreciate that. Okay.

All right. Any other questions, Members? Seeing none, we'll move on to our next measure, HB874, relating to child performers. It requires parents or legal guardians of a minor in theatrical employment to establish a trust account for the. And we have comments from the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Chair Martin, David Rodriguez with the Department of Labor Industrial Relations. We stand on our written comments noting that it's beyond the DLIR's purview and may. And maybe the law may be found in another section. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much. We have also in person, SAG afra.

Hello, good morning. Thank you so much for hearing this bill. My name is Marisha Palma Elmore and I'm the Hawaii Executive Director for the Screen Actors Guild and American Federation of Television and Radio Artists. And we are the union that represents pretty much everyone you see in front of the camera behind the mic.

Here in Hawaii, we've got, you know, over 1400 Members and nationally, of course, over 165,000 Members. And of those Members, a good portion of them or, you know, a portion of them are children and minors. And here in Hawaii, we do have minors also that work in this kind of employment.

So I want to thank the Committee for hearing this Bill and opening the conversation about what happens with those monies from the children who do earn on whether it's TV shows, movies, et cetera, and what we can do to help provide them some kind of financial stability or support when they finish their work as a minor and become adults.

So standing on the testimony that we've provided, we're very grateful that this is being heard. And I also want to point to the little part about the social media influencers being included in that. And again, I want to commend you because that's a big step.

The materials that I sent out to the Committee, I put a paper that kind of breaks down what other states are doing and what states have Coogan type laws, trust accounts, but also what states have included social media influencers that are minors in that world of protection. So there aren't that many.

So you guys are ahead of the game. Thank you very much for really putting children first and children who work in this environment first. Also.

There are some suggestions there and I know some of those amendments may seem really out there right now and maybe a step too far for some folks, but it's something we need to start thinking about now, considering.

I don't want to go through all the stats, but I sent everyone that one law review article that really breaks down how much money is being made by influencers. It's in the billions. And how many of those influencers, a portion of them that are children, that are making that money, that the parents are. That parents are controlling.

I'm trying to find my words carefully because I understand. And one of the things I want to point to that people may have some argument with is that there is a difference between a content creator and an influencer.

This isn't going to, you know, the way it's written isn't about squelching a parent or anyone's rights to create content. It really is about that influencer realm when you get to that place where billions of dollars are being made off your kid.

So there's so much more I can say, and I want to make sure that I'm succinct and keep my time short. But please feel free to call me or text me and we'll set up a meeting. And there are experts in the union that are way more versed in this than I am.

And I would love to be able to have a sit down or a zoom to talk more about what we can do to protect children in this area. And also please take a look at the materials that I sent over. I think there's a lot of information there.

Any questions? We'll come back to that. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much for coming. Then we did have also written testimony and support from the Hawaii State AFL CIO and one individual in support. Members, are there any questions? I have a comment.

The testimony that we refute received from you was very, very brief and didn't have any of the materials you're referencing. Was that emailed separately? Okay. Okay. I do have a question for D. I do understand that this is not in your wheelhouse. Do you have a recommendation for whom it might be appropriate to manage this?

I do apologize. I don't think we have a recommendation. Chair.

Okay.

Sorry.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Members, any other questions? zero, go ahead. Representative.

I had a question when the.

For who is your question?

Not sure who's answering them.

We have two potential testifiers.

When the minor has to put the money in the trust, when can they use the money to be accessed? Do we have to wait till the 18?

The way this is written to the age of majority. Correct.

So let's say a young child right now, you know, a lot of people making money. And so the parents does not have any control or the child don't have any control of the finance at that time? At this time? No. Okay.

I just wanted to know how this Bill was and I think the way the Bill is written, it's 15%, I believe would be put into a trust account for that child, set aside.

So 15% would be set aside. And the rest of the money that the child can use.

No. Goes to the parent or whoever is making the guardian, whoever's making the contract with the, let's say if they were in a movie, whoever is listed as the guardian, you know, so nothing 400% going into the trust. It's only 15% the way it's written today, sir. Yeah. Okay.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other questions? Seeing then we're going to move to our next measure which is relating to early childhood child care. It requires the Department of Human Services to establish and implement a child care provider subsidy and bonus program. And we have comments from the Executive Office on Early Learning.

Hi, Chair and Vice Chair Yuuko Arikawa-Cross, Director of the Executive Office on Early Learning. We stand on our written testimony with comments.

Thank you very much. We also have in support Early Childhood Action Strategy.

Good morning again, Vivian Eto with Early Childhood Action Strategy. We stand on our written comments in support of the Bill and will be available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And we have Hawaii Children's Action Network. Speaks in support.

Mahalo. Chair, Vice Chair and Committee. We stand on our written comments in support. Mahalo.

We have possibly on Zoom, the Hawaii Chamber of Commerce. Go ahead, Sherry or Comm-, Chamber Member. Okay, we'll go to. If she comes. If she comes on, we can go back to her. We have one individual in support on zoom. Is Chloe here? Okay.

Aloha. Can you folks hear me okay? Yep. Okay. Mahalo. Aloha. [Speaking Hawaiian]. Mahalo to chair and Vice Chair and Committee Members. Before I share my personal story, I just wanted to share a quote from my longtime mentor who has over 20 years of experience in early learning. She says families have to speak on our behalf.

It's one thing for us to speak and toot our own horn and demand what we need, but the people that are benefiting from us and our service and to be more vocal as to the work that we do and the importance of the work that we do, it's a huge systemic and societal issue.

So now for myself, my spouse and I were both early learning professionals. And as working parents in Alice families, we've been forced to take on second jobs to meet the high cost of living in Hawaii. So as professionals, we are providing essential service, and, you know, we should be able to work and earn a living wage.

I please ask for your support with this measure. Mahalo nui. Aloha.

Thank you for testifying today. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Oh, wait, let me see. Is there. Let me mention more people. Oh, she came back. Okay. Hawaii Chamber of Commerce. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon, Chair, good afternoon. Good afternoon? Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Vice Chair and Members of Committee Tonga Hopoi here, Vice President for Economic development, Government Relations, and Community Relations at Chamber of Commerce, Hawaii. We stand in our accepted testimony of support and available for any questions. Mahalo.

Thank you very much. We also had comments from the Department of Human Services. So written support or did you want to, oh, sorry. Okay. It didn't say that you wanted to testify in person, but so happy to have you.

It was a mistake on on our part. Good morning Chair Marten, Vice Chair Olds and Members of the Committee. I'm Dayna Luka on behalf of DHS Director Yamani. The Department stands on our written testimony providing comments. Thank you for the opportunity to testify and I'm here for any questions. Thank you very much.

We also had written testimony and support from the American Association of University Women, from Puakalehua Early Learning Consortium, from Hawaii Association of Infant Mental Health, from Commit to Keiki and from one individual. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Seeing none.

We will move on to our next Item which is HB322 relating to voter registration. Requires the Department of Human Services to automatically transmit voter registration information for any MedQuest applicant.

Authorizes state agencies to implement automatic voter registration if designated by the Office of Elections and allows instruction permits, provisional licenses, driver's license, ID cards to be automatically registered or pre registered to vote unless the applicant opts out. And we have in support the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities. Thank you very much.

We have with comments State of Hawaii Office of Elections. Maybe not here. And we have in support on Zoom Perhaps League of Women Voters, Hawaii. Please go ahead.

Thank you Chair Martin and good morning to you and the Committee Members. I'm Janet Mason. I'm testifying in support of the measure. The league strongly supports the intent of the bill which is to expand automatic voter registration in Hawaii. But we have suggested some amendments to the bill.

We don't really think it's necessary to limit the program only to the Med quest population served by the Department of Human Services. In fact, we have a specific suggestion to expand the program to cover both the Department of Human Services and the Health Department.

Also, the Bill proposes to make registering to vote an opt out arrangement which would be different than our current automatic registration process which is an opt in arrangement. We think it's pretty important to make it clear to people being served by these offices that it's voluntary.

There's no coercion involved in asking them if they would like to vote. We do support a small appropriation for the affected departments so that they could launch this program. We note that the Department of Transportation was able to do this without an additional appropriation and happy to answer any other questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your testimony. We might have another individual on Zoom in support Kaili or not here. Okay. We have written comments from the Department of Human Services, written support from Hawaii alliance for Progressive Action and Democrats Democratic Party of Hawaii Education Caucus. Also written support from 21 individuals and written opposition from two individuals.

Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Yes, please.

Good morning Committee Members. My name is Cameron Hurt. I am the Program Director for Common Cause Hawaii. We are in strong support of this bill.

What this does is it allows us to continue expanding upon what we've already done with our automatic voter registration program and that is to make it an opt out system and that is not coercing anybody. What we are ultimately saying is our state is guaranteeing every citizen the right to vote.

Should you not want to take that right, that's fine. All you have to do is check. I don't want to vote and that's it. But what this is doing is it's reversing it to an opt out. Therefore, this is really going to help with our keiki, with our kupuna populations and with our disability, with our disabled communities.

As to also making sure that other programs are able to be able to use the information to set up automatic voter registration. I do know that the Senate does have bills that would address that concern specifically. So again we are in strong support at Common Cause Hawaii. Thank you and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, are there any questions of our testifiers? Seeing none, we will move on to our next measure which our last one, HB933 relating to General excise tax reductions.

It reduces the get on the gross proceeds for sale of groceries eligible for SNAP and also for over the counter medication. So we have here to testify with comments the Department of Taxation in person.

Good morning Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Winston Wong, Administrative Rules Officer on behalf of Gary Suganuma and the Department of Taxation. The Department of Tax has submitted written comments and testimony. We'll stand on those comments but I will be available for any questions you may have. Thank you very much.

We have next the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii in support.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Ted Kaphalis with Grassroot Institute. I'll keep this brief, but we just want to stand in strong support of HB933 and we do also ask that you all look to further lower the rate and hopefully eventually get rid of this regressive tax. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you very much. Next we have on Zoom Hawaii Food Industry Association in support, not present. Do we have the Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments? Please go Ahead, Tux foundation of Hawaii, can you hear me?

Lauren Zorbel is here and she's before me.

Go ahead, Tom. zero, I'm sorry. Is this Hawaii Food Industry Association? Okay. Please go ahead, Lauren.

Okay, thanks. Hi, Lauren Zorbel. On behalf of Hawaii Food Industry Association, We represent approximately 200 food and beverage supply chain companies in the state. We're in strong support of this measure. There's overwhelming data that taxing groceries is extremely aggressive and hurts lower income families. There's a lot of research that shows that it increases food insecurity rates.

Hawaii has one in three individuals struggling with food insecurity currently, and that number increased is 30% on Hawaii Island. So we are in the middle of a food insecurity crisis right now. So we really find it inappropriate to add 4.5% to people's grocery checks bills at this time.

I included in my testimony a litany of studies for you to review, but one that I found particularly interesting was that Georgia's phased elimination of the grocery tax in the 1990s resulted in 691 million in household savings and 18,000 new jobs and 1.4 billion in economic output by 2021.

So there's a lot of evidence that decreasing taxes on groceries increases economic output. There are plenty of ways to pay for this, including the fact that there is a large surplus. We just ask that you seriously consider this measure as Hawaii is one of very few states that taxes groceries at the full rate or at all.

So thank you very much for the opportunity to testify and I'm available for questions.

Thank you very much. I'm glad you're so optimistic about our state finances. No one else is. All right, next we have Tom Yamachika from the Tax Foundation of Hawaii.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation. We have purely technical comments on the measure. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much for your testimony and for being here. We also had in support Hawaii Food bank and Hawaii Pacific Health. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Members, are there any questions?

Go ahead. Rep. Amato, is there anyone here from DHS that can speak to this? Thank you. I'm just curious. Aren't SNAP food purchases already exempt from get?

Yes, they are, but I think this bill is proposing that. That that same type of not taxing food items for the General public. I believe that's what the bill's proposing. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Okay, I have a question for Tom Yamachicka. Can you please did you have. Your testimony was late. Did you. Can you clarify what your recommendations were for changes, if any, or was it just commentary?

It was just commentary. Okay. Yeah. And I think I did read it.

Okay. I didn't remember any specific recommendations. Okay. Thank you very much. Members. Are there any other questions? Nope. Okay, then we are done with our bills. We will move right into decision making.

And so going back to HB 1140 relating to the homeless encampments on deal in our land, I recommend we pass this out just with technical amendments for clarity, consistency and in style and effective date July 1st, 3000, which will be the same defect date for all the other measures today and blank out appropriations.

Are there any comments or questions? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote, please. It's 1140.

My apologies. Trying to grab a mint. Voting on HB 1140. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments.

[ROLL CALL]

Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Moving next to HB 1486 relating to the public order. This is the one about the bus stops. A lot of discussion on this one. We really missed having the AG's office weigh in on the concerns raised by the Public Defender's office. So I would recommend passing this out for further discussion.

Defecting the date and asking it. We'll put in our Committee notes asking for the AG's office to weigh in should it have another hearing. Vice Chair for the vote. Any questions or comments from our question? Okay, question from. Everything's going with amendments.

Voting on HB 1486. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments.

Any Members voting nay?

No. No vote for me Vice Chair.

With reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next, Bill 877 relating to encampments, the buffer zone around schools. This one I recommend. Page one, line 11. And page two, line three, change "K through 12" to "pre-K through 12" to include our youngest learners. On page two, line three, adding to the definition of buffer zone on public or private property.

Page two, line nine, change to "B. Violation of subsection A shall be petty misdemeanor" using the AG's recommendation. And then page two, line 21, add in F. Law enforcement personnel shall take personal belongings into custody and store at the police station or other designated location to be returned upon release from custody, just to take care of the belongings that might be at the encampment.

And then to defect the date and and do technical amendments. Members, are there any comments or questions? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB877. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations?

Reservations.

Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB241 relating to child care.

For this one I recommend page two, line one, replace item B with "instead, the Department of Human Services shall contract directly with licensed infant and toddler child care center and group child care center providers unless the center is part of, owned by or operated by a private educational institution, shall not be eligible for a contract if it would violate Article 10, Section 1 of the Hawaii State Constitution" as recommended by the Department.

Also on page two, line 11, change from two licensed group child care centers to one center. Page two, line 16 include the HCAN language. D. The Department of Human Services shall monitor seat utilization and may adjust the number of contracted seats based on enrollment trends and provider performance, provided that providers with consistently low utilization of contracted seats may be subject to contract modification or termination.

Members, are there any questions or comments? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote, please.

Voting on HB241. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next is HB880 relating to early child intervention. This one is to blank out the appropriation amounts but note in the Committee report that Department of Health recommends a 52,800 per year to cover the cost of reclass, classification in Section 3 and defect the date. Are there any questions or comments, Members? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote, please.

Voting on HB880. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next is HB 874 relating to child performers. This one is still clearly a work in progress, but I am going to pass it out to continue the conversation and we will defect the date.

And on page three, line five, define penalty to mean misappropriation or fraudulent use of trust funds is a violation of fiduciary duty subject to civil penalties, criminal prosecution and removal from the position of Trustee of the Trust Account.

And then furthermore, we will add a savings clause to the contract so that it will remain valid if a court finds part of it to be unenforceable. Vice, any comments or questions? All right, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB874. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations? Chair Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. HB238 relating to early child care. This one I recommend passing with amendments just affecting the date and then note in the Committee report that DHS request requests an effective date of 1-31-2026 in order to be able to do the work. Are there any comments or questions? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB238. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next HB 322 relating to voter registration.

I recommend technical amendments for clarity, consistency and style and then to completely delete the requirement for DHS to do the automatic transmission as they have a much lower burden of proof for their documentation than is required for voter registration and they don't have the current technical infrastructure in information system in place.

But I think it's a good idea to work on that for the future. I wouldn't want it to jeopardize the other parts of the Bill which I think are ready to go. I like the opt out rather than opt in so we'll just delete that section and defect the date. Members, are there any questions or comments?

Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 322. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no?

And Rep. Garcia. With reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next we have HB 933 relating to General Excise Tax reductions.

I recommend passing with a defective date with technical amendments for clarity, consistency and style and then putting in the Committee notes that DOTAX recommends a start day of January 1, 2027 to allow businesses to update their accounting systems to account for the two different tax rates. Members, are there any comments?

Comments here. This is a good Bill. I'm going to vote yes on it, but it just doesn't go far enough. For a long time this building has talked about eliminating the General excise tax on groceries where we're just one of a few states in the whole country that still does this.

It's a step forward but the in my opinion the Bill should be amended to not reduce by 0.5% but the entire thing. So I'm going to vote yes. It's a step forward but more needs to be done. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone else with comments or questions? Seeing none Vice Chair for the vote

Voting on HB933. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Committee Members. We are adjourned.