House Standing Committee on Finance

Okay. We're gonna convene the Committee on Finance for our April Fool's Agenda. Okay. First up is set up Bill177 SD1.

First up, we have the Department of Agriculture in support.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Cedric Gates here on behalf of the Department of Agriculture. The Department stands on its written testimony in support here for any questions. Mahalo.

Thank you. Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. We'll stand on our written testimony in support.

Thank you. And do we have Hunter Hurtado in support on Zoom? Yes.

Yes. Hello.

Hey. Please proceed.

Hi. Aloha. And Vice Chair and Members of the Committee, mahalo for the opportunity to provide spoken testimony today. My name is Hunter Hurtado and I am a student at HPU where I study political science and philosophy. I'm testifying in strong support of SB177 because this bill prioritizes long term environmental protections over short term monitoring incentives.

Hawaii's AINA is deeply interconnected and fragile and time and time again we've seen the devastating consequences of waiting too long to act. By passing this Bill, Hawaii will be applying the precautionary principle of taking proactive measures to prevent ecological harm rather than reacting when the damage is already irreversible.

I believe SB177 aligns with environmental frameworks such as ecocentrism and biocentrism, which recognize that nature holds intrinsic value beyond humanity. Human utility, which are values deeply connected to Aloha. Ina. By supporting this bill, we reinforce two of Hawaii's sustainable development goals. Firstly, number 12, which calls for responsible consumption and production.

And secondly, goal number 14, which promises to protect our life below water. Sustainable policies not only protect our ecosystems, but also create long term economic opportunities. I believe that a thriving environment supports local businesses, food security, tourism and all living things we surround ourselves with, such as our marine life.

These are all pillars of Hawaii's economy and all of which depend on responsible policies like SB177. For those reasons, I respectfully asked the Committee to vote in support of SB177, SD1 HD1 and I thank you for your time. Aloha.

Thank you. That's everybody who indicated they'd be joining us. Also testimony in support from the County of Hawaii, Department of Research and Development, Hawaii Aquaculture and Aquaponics Association, and one individual. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom.

Okay, questions? Members, thank you. Moving on to the next Bill Senate Bill 328 SD1 HD1.

First we have the Department of Taxation with comments. Thank you. Agribusiness Development Corporation in support. Thank you. Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

Written testimony in support.

Tax foundation of Hawaii with comments.

Thank you, Chair. Vice Chair. Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation. We are concerned that the bill is not something that we normally provide tax credits for. And with that, I'll just kind of leave it to my written comments. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Members. Also, testimony in support from DBEDT, one organization and one individual. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, questions? Thank you. Moving on to the next Bill. Senate Bill 9, sorry. 894SD2HD1.

Okay. First we have Agribusiness Development Corporation in support.

Good afternoon, Chair. Vice Chair. We stand in very strong support.

Thank you. University of Hawaii System in support. Thank you. Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. Do we have Hawaii Cattle's Council in support on Zoom?

Yes. Thank you, Chair. Vice Chair. Members of the Committee, Nicole Galassi on behalf of the Hawaii Cattleman's Council. We stand on our written testimony in support. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everybody. I have checked in. Also testimony and support from the Department of Education and dbed, the Hawaii State Youth Commission, two organizations and four individuals. Everyone in support. Anybody else in the room wishing to Testify? Anybody on Zoom questions?

Moving on to the next bill. Senate Bill 1186 SD2 HD2.

First, we have the Department of the Attorney General. Oh, sorry. Department of Agriculture, I think.

Thank you, Chair. The Department of Agriculture stands on its testimony in strong support of this measure. Here for any questions.

Thank you. Agribusiness Development Corporation in support.

Very strong support.

Thank you. Ulupono Initiative in support. We lost them. Okay. Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

The Hawaii Farm Bureau was down on its written testimony. In support.

Thank you. Oahu Resource Conservation and Development Council in support. Thank you. Hawaii Food Industry Association in support on Zoom. Not present. Okay, that's everybody checked in. Also testimony and support from dbed, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, County of Hawaii, Department of Research and Development, City and County of Honolulu, Office of Climate Change, Sustainability and Resilience.

Comments from the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency. Testimony and support from six other organizations and 6 and 2 individuals, all in support. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom questions?

Thank you. Moving on to the next bill.

Senate Bill 1142 SD1 HD1 first, we have DCCA Division of Financial Institutions with comments. Thank you. Do we have United Policyholders in support on Zoom?

Not present? Yes, we do. We do. I'm sorry, I was having trouble unmuting my and turning on my video. Thank you. I'm here. Okay. Please proceed.

Good afternoon, Representative Kyle Yamashita, Chair of the Committee, Vice Chair Jenna Takenouchi and Members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of this very important bill this afternoon. I am currently working for United Policyholders and have been working with insureds for over a year now.

And many of these insureds are not collecting insurance on the money that they've had to tender to their mortgage companies. When an insurance policy pays out, they pay the check both to the policyholder and to the bank for the dwelling. Except for some Hawaii banks, all the other banks are not paying any interest.

I noted that in the opposition, the banks are opposing this because of the 22% amount of interest that the bill provides.

That is really quite a minimal amount of interest considering that the banks are still collecting mortgages, still collecting interest on those mortgages from the survivors of this disaster and would be doing the same in any future disaster. So we strongly support this bill.

We think it's an important bill for the future of Hawaii and for any future losses or disasters. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Hawaii Financial Services Association in opposition on Zoom.

Aloha. Good afternoon. Vice Chair, Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. Marvin Dang, the attorney for Hawaii Financial Services Association. We oppose this bill as drafted and offer a proposed amendment which is on page one. It should be noted that mortgage servicers are generally not banks.

In fact, of the 208 mortgage servicers that are regulated by DCCA, most of them are not banks. They're non depository, they're not in the business of holding funds. They, if there's any insurance proceeds, they need to follow the requirements of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the other requirements that exist.

You know, when a house is damaged or destroyed and insurance pays out to repair or replace that particular dwelling, it's important to ensure that the monies that are paid out are distributed to the homeowner. The reason why I think there is some confusion as to the holdings of the monies is this.

The house is collateral for the mortgage. The reason for insurance is to repair or rebuild the house. I think it's undisputed that the mortgage servicers do pay out monies initially. However, when the monies are paid out, it's important to Note that they do go to the homeowner.

And it's the homeowner's responsibility certainly to invest and make sure that the monies are around to specifically repair and replace.

If there's any restriction on further disbursements, it's only because after the inspections are made of the construction or repairs, there is an issue as to whether or not there are sufficient monies that has been spent and is still available to complete the, to complete the project.

Now, in terms of the 2%, I should point out that when this bill was introduced and Even in the SB 1 which came over, it didn't have the 2%, it had the national money market account rate. And that is not only in this bill, but it's in two other bills, two admin, bills HB 1047 and SB 1366.

So those have been the measurements, the requirements in at least three bills this session. We incorporate by reference the testimony of the Mortgage Bankers Association of Wade, which shows that 2% maybe something that is doable now, but historically rates have even been lower than that for money markets. Just a few years ago it was less.

And to impose a straight 2% regardless of what the mortgage servicers can get from an institution is unfair and unreasonable. Again, most of the mortgage servicers are not banks, they're non depository and they have no control over interest rates. And I think that's reflected also in DCCA's testimony.

I'll be happy to answer any questions that you might have. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they would be joining us. Also testimony in support from three organizations, one organization, opposition, one organization with comments and 10 individuals in support. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom questions?

Okay, thank you. Moving on to the next bill, Senate Bill 989 SD1HD1.

We have the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation in support. Thank you.

Hawaii Farm Bureau in supporting testimony. In support.

Thank you. Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii in support. Thank you. Hawaii Food Industry Association in support. On Zoom not present. Okay. Also two other organizations and one individual in support. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom questions?

Okay, thank you. Moving on to the next Bill. Senate Bill 1578 SD2HD1.

We have the East West Center in support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Zach Espino for the East West Center. You have a written testimony.

But I would like to point out that this measure would be of great service to the center to be able to receive direct state appropriation, which in turn Exempting us from Chapter 42F of Hawaii Revised Statutes, the Legislature established the center in 1975 as a nonprofit public corporation with the understanding of our strategic location here in Hawaii to be able to partner with the state on critical matters to advance priorities related to the Indo Pacific region.

Region. You know, the center injects nearly $30 million into our local economy. We have over 10,000 local residents who engage in our programs and events, and over 2,000 international participants come to the center every year and are integrated in our local community, participating in our programming.

And as you know, the center is funded in part by our congressional appropriation. And as you know, we are continuing to navigate the uncertainty of our federal funding. And in this bill, I know there is interest for sister state relations.

And the center has continued to be a trusted convener in this area, being able to help advance our strategic priorities as a state on the national, international level. I did want to share, you know, quote from one of our fondest supporters, Ms. Jeanne Rolls.

And through her support, philanthropically and in various ways as well, she notes that because of her involvement with the center, she was able to touch the world in Hawaii through the East West Center.

And I think this is really a testament and a commitment to the Center's willingness to collaborate with the state on things that matter to both of our institutions in General. So thank you for this opportunity to testify. I'm available for any questions along with our team here and with our board chair, former Governor John Waihe. Thank you.

Thank you. Apologies. Do we have DBEDT in support?

Yes. Aloha chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members, Dennis Ling for DBEDT. DBEDT stands in its written testimony in support of this measure. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Also testimony and support from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the East West Center Employees Association. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay. Questions? All right, thank you. We'll move on to the next Bill. Senate Bill 1589, SD3 HD1.

First up, we have DBIT, the Stadium Authority with comments. Thank you, Sanford Car Development in support.

Development on behalf of Aloha District Partners.

Thank you. Also one other organization in support. That's all the written testimony we've received. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Questions? All right, thank you. We'll move on to the next bill. Senate Bill 747, SD1 HD1.

You have the State Board of Education with comments. That's all the written testimony we received. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay. Nobody. The question was. So we'll move on to the next bill. Senate Bill 1300 SD1 HD1.

Okay. Department of Education in support.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Dean Uchida, Deputy Superintendent with Department of Education. The Department stands on a testimony in support of this measure. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Hawaii State Teachers Association in support. Democratic Party of Hawaii Education Caucus in support. Unite Here Local 5 in support.

Unite Here Local 5. Jolie Tokusato. We stand by written testimony, but I wanted to put in my own individual testimony as well. Now more than ever, with federal workers and many others losing their jobs and the. The rising costs of just about everything, we have to make sure that our children have enough food to eat.

Just imagine if it's your child, your grandchild, your neighbors, any child going hungry, how will they learn? How will they be healthy? If you say no because you don't care, we will all see you. And so shame. So I just wanted to say, please, please pass this bill. Kids need to eat. Thank you.

Thank you. We have ILW Local 142 in support on Zoom.

Not present.

Hi. Sorry. I'm Sadie Walker, and I was supposed to be talking.

Okay. Please proceed.

Okay. Hello. I'm Sadie Walker, a student at Mailani Middle School. I am happy to have the opportunity to speak to you today about the benefits of free school lunches. Free school is a stressful time for most of us.

So the last thing any of us want to worry about is not having enough money in our accounts to eat lunch, or ashamed that we are one of the ones to get free meals because our parents don't earn enough money. You will see kids at my school during lunchtime just sitting around watching others eat.

And at my school, you can't share your lunches. You can imagine how hard it is to run around during school, from class to class on an empty stomach. Providing free school lunches for all students. Remove that huge stress, along with helping kids feel more equal and not look down upon their peers.

Thank you for your time and please pass SB1 300.

Thank you. Do we have the Kauai Democratic Party in support on Zoom?

In person?

Yes.

Oh, sorry.

No, I'm here. Okay. Please proceed. Thank you. Hi. Joelle Edwards with the Kauai Democratic Party. Also, I'm a Ohana Leadership Council with HCAN. I stand by my written testimony. I want to thank you all for the hearing.

And I do want to add, as a rural community up on the North Shore of Kauai, most of our students are Traveling up to 11 and a half hours to attend school. I own a small market. The bus stop is located right in front of my market.

And in the mornings we're already seeing kids suffering because either they didn't have a breakfast and certainly when they're coming in from the bus, there are famished. And a lot of them we've kind of asked and they either did not have lunch, were not packed a lunch, or they do not qualify.

And so I think even with income requirements, I really, although I love that we're looking at for the Alice families, I would urge you to amend it for preschool lunches for all the way the income guidelines are changing, especially with the Administration that's currently at the national level.

We really don't know where people are going to be landing and what a great opportunity right now to take care of our cake. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next we have Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Nate Hicks, Hawaii Public Health Institute in support. We recognize one in three families are facing food insecurity. You've heard me talk about before how we need free school meals for all students.

We would like this Bill to change, but recognize, you know, we are very happy that this is focusing on those most vulnerable. We also recognize that there are risks to the existing programs that might be coming. And making sure we have a robust system in place to make sure these families aren't struggling is very important.

We also know that there are proposals here in the state to increase the cost of meals that would put us out even further. And so it's important that we as a body, we as a state, are proactive in making sure that things don't get worse. But we have the opportunity to make things better. Mahalo.

Thank you. Hawaii Appleseed in support.

Aloha Chair Vice Chair Members, Daniela Spodo here representing Hawaii Appleseed. We as an organization believe that strong safety nets are one of the key roles of good government. So we strongly support this bill. We do have a couple of suggestions we think would strengthen the bill, which I'm just going to take a minute to run through.

First, there's an arbitrary existing statute on the books that requires parents to pay half the cost the DOE pays for meals, which will need to be amended to make sure that it's not. This bill doesn't put them at odds with that statute. We have suggested language in our written testimony.

Secondly, we are also concerned that even with this expansion, some students will still fall through the cracks. One national study found that 34% of students that were denied free or reduced price meals were actually eligible to receive those them. The truth is that we don't always know what's going on at home.

We know that students don't always get to choose the families that they're born into and we have an opportunity to provide those benefits while they're at school.

So for this reason, we would again like to appeal to the Committee and to the Legislature broadly to consider amending this bill to make meals free for all students by school year 27-28. That would give the DOE a three year ramp up to be able to to implement the program fully.

A similar bill was actually passed out of this Committee earlier this session and we have since conferred with the DOE on the price estimates for both versions of the bill which are also in our written testimony.

And lastly, I'd like to address a sentiment that I have been hearing which is that we shouldn't pay for meals that can for students that can afford to pay. My response to this is that returning a few thousands of dollars per year to Hawaii families, even those above, above the threshold, is a good thing.

It allows them to reinvest those dollars in local businesses or to save for the future. And personally, I would rather see my tax dollars spent feeding 100 children who could have afforded to pay if it meant ensuring that even one child doesn't go hungry. In closing, I want to say that we get it.

We have a lot of budget priorities to juggle. Hawaii Appleseed would love to discuss some progressive ways the state can raise revenue for this initiative, some of which are still alive this session that don't place the burden on families and children. Thank you.

Thank you, Hawaii Hunger Action Network in support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Genevieve Mumma, Hawaii Hunger Action Network. As someone who grew up in Hawaii public schools, I was always sharing my lunch with my friends. So I know firsthand that for many Keiki, school meals are the most nutritious meals that they receive all day.

And for many others, school meals are the only meal that they receive all day. Our network is in support of any measure that would bring us closer to the goal of free school meals for all. That's all. Mahalo for your time.

Thank you. We have Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks and support on Zoom.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Nicole Wu, again from Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks. We believe that making free school meals free, or at least more affordable to more and more families is a cost of living. Issue here in Hawaii. So many families are struggling, especially with the new Administration coming from D.C.

it's great for the state to consider every way that we can make sure that families can afford to feed their kids and afford to stay here. Many other states are passing universal free meal stay laws and so Hawaii should join them.

There's also a lot of evidence showing that feeding kids when they're at school helps their academic performance, gives them better nutrition. So it's a really great investment in our children. Public school is free. Kids need to eat to learn. So, you know, the meal should be free too.

If this Bill stays the way it is and gets us closer to universal free, it's a great first step. So we strongly urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. We have the American Heart Association in support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair. Members of the Committee of Inouy on behalf of the American Heart Association, we'll stand on our written comments in support of this bill. But we did just want to note and highlight a clarifying amendment that we referenced in our testimony on subsection B on page three of the bill.

It makes reference to the national lunch program. We'd also recommend including the National Breakfast program as a part of the language just to include school meals. So, you know, thank you for the opportunity to testify. We'll be available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have Michael O'Dare in support? On Zoom? Not present. Okay. Gigi Pasaoa in support.

My name is Gianna Passawa Ojichi. I am in the fourth grade in the school at Ever Elementary. I support the bill. CB 1300. However, I think it should be improvised to be for everyone. We should have free lunch available even if the family makes a lot of money or just a little bit of money.

Let's say you have multiple kids. You may not qualify under the current bill, but you might still be struggling. In Hawaii, no student should have to put their school lunch back just because there is too much debt. And whether you like school lunch or not, it's a big part of your day.

Like one student can win the whole class just because they didn't get a proper meal. While the teachers are trying their best, all this comes down to is whether they had a proper meal or not. And should money be a reason why kids don't get school lunch? No.

And if kids are not getting free school lunch when they really need it, then they're not going to be eating. So how do schools expect them to be doing well and getting higher marks if they're not getting enough food. There are a lot of kids who can rely on the school giving them free school lunch.

But there are thousands and thousands of students who don't receive free school lunches when they really should get it. Parents do their best to pay for school lunch, but every time it ends up being too much.

Parents also have to pay for other centrals like a house, which many have to work two jobs to even afford one, let alone school lunch money.

And even if they do make a decent amount of money, taxes are taken out of their paycheck, which is something schools don't think about regarding how much money the parent makes and whether they qualify for free school lunch.

The amount of food children get is a domino effect, meaning if they don't get enough food, it causes a whole big effect on everyone. Like they could be distracted, then decide to distract another student, making the teacher have to stop the lesson for them.

Or the parents are so worried they didn't get a proper meal that they get too worried and distracted to do their work. Now let's talk about a little bit of research I did myself.

Schools also don't think about how the school lunch money all adds up to be really expensive since school lunches are around $2.50 if you multiply 180 because that's how much days the school there are times $2 and a half it would be 450. And that's for only one kid.

If you have more than one kid it gets really expensive. All of that just shows how bad we need free school lunch to be free for all of us. No matter how much money we make. A lot or little lunch is important for all of us and is very impactful and a big part of anyone's day.

Thank you. I think we have Catholic Charities Hawaii in support. Thank you. Next we have Christine Russo in support.

Aloha chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Christine Russo. I'm a teacher at James Campbell High School, and I live in the community of Ewa Beach. I also have three children. So I'm testifying as a parent and a teacher today this bill.

I appreciate the hearing being scheduled and I want to talk a little bit about the current bill and how we could possibly amend the bill so that it's expanded to include free lunch for all families. The way it's written at this time, it wouldn't, at least for my family, we wouldn't qualify.

And so I just want to express how all families could really benefit from not having this extra expense on their plate because it is a struggle living in Hawaii. Of course, it's amazing that we're trying to include those Alice families here, but really we can expand it to include everyone. I think that would be ideal.

I also want to talk a little bit about the fact that the current process for qualifying for free school lunch is. It is exclusionary for a few different reasons. So the first reason is parents are the ones that have to take the action to fill out this form.

So a lot of our kids, there might be things going on at home. We don't know what's going on with their families or whoever their guardian is. And if there are issues happening, there is a probably, there's a good probability that that parent or guardian is never going to take action to actually submit that form.

So it's putting the onus on the family. So that's one part that's problematic. And then the second part that's problematic is the fact that the forms are sent home and it's in English only. So we have, we know a lot of our families, they might speak Tiquis, Marshallese, Tagalo, Ilocano, Samoan. It's not even available in Hawaiian.

Ole Hawaii. So that's a problem. Right? Families won't even know what that form is or how to read it, what it means. And even if they're to go online to the online form, that one, there's other options, but there's only. It's English, Spanish and Chinese. So that, that's another reason why it's exclusionary.

And then again, the third reason is just the income thresholds. And you know, just still, like, Even with the $107,000 cap, it would cut out a lot of families who could really benefit from this. The other thing I want to talk about is what it looks like when students don't get a proper meal at school.

So if students are. When they go to eat lunch, if their meal is short funds, the DOE will still serve them up until a certain threshold, and at that point, the DOE will not serve them anymore. So we have situations where kids would be denied lunch and this might be their only meal that they're getting.

I also want to talk a little bit about the trauma that's caused by food insecurity. So we talk a lot about, like, the physical effects of having difficulty learning when you're hungry. But also I want to talk about the trauma that is caused by food insecurity.

And when a child is facing trauma, they are not able to, or they have a very difficult time learning because they're in a fight or flight State of mind. So I want to talk about that as well.

Thank you so much for your time today, and please pass this bill and hopefully with amendments to expand it to include all public school students. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have Kristen Young in support on Zoom? Not present. Kiwi Shaw in support.

I go to the school of [unintelligible]. I support free school meals because some of the Keiki only get food at school. And a lot of the time when you're hungry, you can't learn. And what's the point of going to school if you're just hungry? Thank you.

We have Alfred Medeiros in support.

Aloha Maikako. Alfred Kalki Hona Madeiros, Koi Noa no Waianae Mau. Mahalo Chair, Vice Chair, all the representatives here, because that's what it's for right there. I come from Waianae. We live poverty out there. Exactly what the Keiki was saying. And some of the adults, this is when they come to school to eat.

I watch my own neighbors, kids come home from school starving because they don't get fed at their school. They get denied access to it. You know, I would like to see amendments to this to change to also include breakfast, but also to include every student in Hawaii.

You know, I've been through the system, 14 years of my life in the system, and I never heard one person complain about giving free meals to incarcerated people. But when it comes to Keiki, we draw back there. I don't understand that. You know, I'm a farmer. I take care of three farms.

One of our farms is GAP certified to work at DUE. But it's all about contributing and giving to them. You know, we have three big farms to give produce, fresh produce. We do this to people on the streets. We [unintelligible] them because that's what we do in Hawaii I ne we take care of one another.

When we was kids, I think it was 25 cents for a ticket for We Eat Lunch. 10 cents if he was on welfare, whatever it may be. Now these kids just watch other people eat, you know, because they come from living on the streets, especially on the west side. I watch this every single day.

You know, we have groups that come through our neighborhoods, try to help and provide stuff. But the shame part is what makes them stop trying to get help, you know, and that's like kids in school, you watch them, they're quiet, they're dormant.

They go into their corner, but they're suffering inside because nobody has love in aloha for these kk. So I asked you guys, pass this with the amendments and listen to the keiki. If you guys want to see what's going on in the schools, go check it out. Go take a field trip.

You know, if we can't allocate funds to pay the head of the. Of the Department of Education almost half $1.0 million salary, right, we should be allocating funds the same way for a keiki because they deserve to eat just like how these people incarcerated are eating for free. Mahalo for you guys. Time. Aloha.

Thank you. Sorry, sorry. If we could refrain from the audience reacting. I know this is a lot of positive, but, you know, if we allow clapping, we also have to allow booing, and that might come into play on a different bill. So thank you. Next, do we have Sadie Walker in support on Zoom? Not present.

Rajin Nakashima in support.

Hello, my name is Rajin Nakashima. Proud Hawaii citizen, local boy, born and raised here. I went to School in 1970. I was born and raised. Went to school in Powwow, which is right down here. Went to Lunalilo, Washington. Graduated from Montgomery High School in 78.

This free lunch program was in the 70s when I used to go to my friend's house at Kalakaua housing. Never have electricity, never have Christmas tree, never have presents. And when school went in, he had free lunch. 25 cents was big money back then. In the 70s, 20, 25, 250 big money too.

For some people, the struggles are real. Relaunch is important for people to be part of the education program. I've witnessed it. I'm just sharing you my story. My father was a military man, so he could give me money. We had Christmas tree. Some of her friends in the housings, they never have.

I support SP1300 because it's important for the underprivileged. People, every family struggles in Hawaii. We need more money. I live paycheck to paycheck. I'm raising my granddaughter. Now that Head Start at Jefferson, hopefully she be one surfer. The struggles are real in 2025. So please do what you guys can for SB 1300.

Help these underprivileged families have lunch in school. Thank you, thank you.

Next we have Crystal Diaz in support.

Good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Crystal and I'm with Unite Here, Local 5. I strongly believe in this bill. I strongly support it. I am a single mom and I too at one point in my life needed this and it helped my son with his school lunch.

So again, again I strongly stand and support this bill and thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next we have JR Bossi in support.

Hello Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is JR Bossi and I'm in full support of this bill, SB 1300. I speak on as a Member of the community and as a Micronesian trying to thrive in the community, having three kids and coming from a low income housing.

I think we come here to try to succeed and seeing our kids go to school and make us living and try to become something.

I think having free meals at school is only going to benefit them to maybe upheld from being just a low income student and maybe thriving in school and becoming something better than just a low income person. So I think having free meals is really going to benefit them.

Not only them but the future of Hawaii and their future as the future of my kids and living in this community. Instead of having food insecurities, they can focus on their education and becoming better people in the state. So I stand on this Bill and I hope you guys pass it. Thank you.

Thank you. Next we have Gina Alcos in support.

Aloha. Thank you for letting us talk today. I'm with Local 5 and I was married, I am married to a guy that's in the construction industry and we have four kids. One year while my husband was working, he went four months without work. That that's how the construction industry is. We already live paycheck to paycheck.

Now we have four kids. How are we going to feed our kids? You know, and it was a big relief to have reduced food programs so that we didn't have to spend that extra money to feed our children when they went to school. And I'm in total support of this. Thank you.

Thank you. Next we have Mason Mcpherson in support.

Hello, my name is Mason and I am in the sixth grade at Stevenson Middle School. I am here to tell you why I think students who currently receive a reduced school lunch should never get their lunch for free. April Fools. Actually, I mean that we need to pass this bill. Living here ain't cheap.

Parents can't always afford school meals and this is, this may be the only thing students get to eat that day. Not eating enough food can also affect our learning. Sometimes when I'm hungry in class, all I can think about is food and that like, makes me lose my focus.

But this is nothing compared to a student who hasn't even eaten a meal since yesterday. And I would hate for any of my friends to feel that way. And last but not least, students that get reduced meals are likely to get teased because everyone could know that they need it. And that isn't even the worst part.

Sometimes kids can't pay for their lunch and they get theirs taken away from them in front of everybody. And that's really sad. Thank you for listening.

Thank you. Next we have Kupuo Ruiz Hyde in support.

Aloha. I'm from Castle High School and I'm here to show my full support for the execution of SB 1300. Every year when the forms for free and reduce are available, I'm sure to deliver it to my parents. However, when I follow up with them about turning it in, they say we don't qualify. We make too much money.

This statement is ironic because although they make more than the qualifications, my parents and I are still ridden with those yellow slips that notify my negative balance when I receive them from my teachers. There is a feeling of guilt that overcomes me.

This feeling derives from the thought of having to tell my parents that they have to use their money to pay for the school debt on top of of adding more money for me to eat. Even though they might not have the money to eat or fill up the fridge.

Some of the thoughts that run through my mind are I shouldn't have gotten that lunch on Monday or I should have spaced out my meals better. In what world or paradise should kids have to think that they should be focusing on their school, how to be students and to be kids?

It is very devastating that my peers and those younger than me have these thoughts. That is why this bill is essential for the physical and mental well being of Hawaii's Keiki. Mahalo.

Thank you for sharing your story. Next we have Taile Kahoopi in support.

Aloha. My name is Taile Kahoopi I and I am a junior at Castle High School. Sorry. I Strongly support this Bill because this Bill really hits close from home. I'm the second oldest out of six and my dad and my stepmom is considered an Atlas family.

It's really sad to see my brothers come home and sorry and tell my parents that they don't have any more money in their account because my younger brothers don't see how much my dad them are struggling to just afford for school meals. I'm actually a strong believer that just all schools should have free meals.

How is it fair that the people that are inCarcerated can have three females and the keiki, the upcoming generation of Hawaii can't even have two? Sorry. How is this fair for us? I have free meals and today I didn't eat lunch because I gave it to my cousin. My cousin's living situation isn't the best.

She doesn't qualify for free or reduced meals and she was hungry. So actually, right before I came, I went down to the snack shop, got a Hot Pocket and a coffee and I tried to eat before coming here so I could be focused. Thank you for listening.

Thank you. Next we have Lilia Matthias in support.

My name is Lilia Matthias. I also come from Castle High School. I am in full support of this bill. I myself qualify for reduced meals and I know how important it is to have a meal every school day. I see my classmates sit in starvation because they don't have the luxury of reduced meals.

And so they ask me for my food. I feel bad for them and I only want them to have what I have. So I'm asking that you amend this bill so all children in Hawaii, you can have a meal while in school. Mahalo for your time. Thank you.

Next we have Halia Tom Jardine in support.

Aloha, Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Halia. I go to Castle High School. I feel like, well, obviously food is a basic necessity. It shouldn't be something you have to, like, qualify for. And with. I'm sure you guys heard this a lot, the cost to live here.

Families struggle a lot with their rent, utilities and all this stuff they have to worry about. And taking this off of their plate can make it easier for families to live here. So I urge you guys to pass SB 1300. Thank you.

Thank you. That's all the people I have checked in.

Also, testimony and support from the Office of the Governor, County of Hawaii Department of Research and Development Council Member Holland, with the Kauai County Council, City and County of Honolulu Climate Office of Climate Change, Sustainability and Resiliency, and the City and County of Honolulu Office of economic revitalization, 23 other organizations and over 200 individuals all in support.

Are any of them in the room or anyone else in the room wishing to testify? Please just state your name and position for the record.

Cameron Hurt, I'm here in my capacity as co-chair of the Hawaii Education, I mean I'm sorry, the Hawaii Democratic Party Education Caucus.

We're going to stand of course on our written testimony and strong support with of course hoping that you guys take into account the amendments that would allow for all Atlas families is a great start and it's a necessary start. It's where we have to however, first year teacher in Hawaii is bringing home $843 a paycheck.

How do I know that? Because I was a first year teacher in Hawaii and I had a son and there were days that I had to decide who was going to eat not because I didn't have a job.

I have four degrees, speak five languages, I taught, I served my community, I gave back and I still couldn't afford to feed myself and my son as a teacher. So yes, there are free and reduced programs, but it's not encompassing and too many hard working families are slipping through the cracks on a strictly governmental side.

The people of the state are asking you to take their tax dollars and invest it in the keiki. We urge you to meet that call. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room, please come forward and state your name and position for the aloha.

Angela Melody Young, testifying on behalf of CARES in support of receiving free or reduced price school lunches to help with reducing food insecurity, obesity rates and poor health.

And so from the Food Research Action Center, the benefits of a free or reduced price to school lunch, it says that these are going to be the benefits with reducing health and income disparities and relating to the topic of reduced prices for school meals.

And so this discussion, what we're talking about within House Bill 1300 will help in this process of democracy to help students to raise up their voice in how health and nutrition will play a role in schools while reducing costs.

And so I'd like to mention that there are a few federally legislated options in terms of grants and funding sources to help the state with strategies to reduce school lunch costs for schools.

For example, the community eligibility provision CEP schools can leverage federal programs to help with low income neighborhoods and to help with streamlining the processes of offering free meals to students.

And also the National School Lunch Program from the United States Department of Agriculture, the Food and Nutrition Service branch administers the program called the National School Lunch Program to provide low cost or free lunches to children participating in schools. I think you have to sign up.

I'm not going to assume what the process is, but the federal office has the instructions step by step process on the USDA website and so the federally administered grants and funding sources to access. Although with a lot of the fear of the federal discussions, it's hard to make sense of like what's the truth and what's being distorted.

So I probably just advise go online and for example, the SNAP office from DHS utilizes the federal USDA grant to do a combination of partnering with Fresh Farm Foods and also low income communities to provide the low income funding source to the people who need it.

So also in the Senate a resolution was heard yesterday for cost management plans also relating to this topic and above and beyond the scope of what's being talked about here and in the Senate there can also be, since this is the finance Committee and expending financial assets is a consideration for everyone, perhaps there can also be plans to help schools grow school gardens.

That way they can reduce costs because then the plants will be from the students and it can help with community bonding. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room? Anybody on Zoom wishing to testify?

Yes. Aloha. My name is Dave Mullinix. I 1964, I was a freshman in high school and a young boy sitting across from me never had lunch and I'd share my lunch with him.

Here we are 60 years later and we still have Keiki who can't eat because they can't afford lunch or they weren't able to bring lunch to school. So I think there are some essential things in life, clean water and protection and the health and safety of our youth.

And so I think if I, if we need to spend tax money on anything, this is one of the most essential things we should be spending it on. So please pass SB 1300 and thank you so much for hearing it. Have a wonderful day and our beautiful Hawaii name.

Thank you. Anybody else on Zoom?

Okay, questions Members?

Yeah, I have a question. Representative Kirsten for DOE real quick. Thank you. Clearly there's a lot of support for that for this program. Is there any projections from your Department that you're aware of if, if this measure was to pass?

Because it would probably increase, maybe you have Covid numbers to pull from increase or would increase the number of lunches served per day, you know, statewide or district wide.

And then is there any part two of that question so, you know, where I'm going with it is any cost savings in, you know, putting out more meals, per employee, per, you know, transportation cost, you know, basically your unit costs would drop because of a larger base.

You mean the cost of the meal or.

Yeah, like your labor, your inputs to the meal, you know, whatever are the components of that.

Yeah, I don't think we have it broken down like that right now, but it's something we can take a look at. Get back to you.

During COVID you had the breakfast and lunch free, right?

I think they were feeding anybody who came to the school, but it was just limited to students.

And even the summer, I think. I don't know if you have. Maybe you could pull numbers from that and just see, like, if the volume expanded from, from 2019. I mean, I'm just curious to see if they, if this went forward, would there actually be some savings on a per meal basis moving forward?

We can look into that and get back to you.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions? Representative Grandinetti.

Up for DOE, in your testimony, you mention, like, annual administrative costs for tracking at the school level. Do you have any idea how much that would be?

Is that for the Alice students? Yeah, yeah, we're looking into that right now because we have our IT section is looking into how we can extract the data from the Free and Reduced Meal Application. And it's kind of complicated because there's several different programs operating at the same time.

So we need to get somebody to look at that and then figure out how we can extract the data. And then is there a, you know, O and M cost to maintain it every year going forward? So we'll have those numbers by next session.

Okay, thank you. Okay. Representative Hussey, thank you.

Vice Chair, could I please have the Hawaii Public Health Institute? Thank you. I think we have a. There's a desire for numbers. So can you provide sort of, I guess, how much does this cost? How much is the, the bill as currently drafted cost?

And then if we were to then aspire to universal free school meals, how much would that cost?

So I think DOE provided testimony on the cost of the current bill, which would, I think, be about 3.33.5 million, something like that. If we were to do free school meals for all, the lost revenue would be estimated around $20 million. And so again, this entire DOE budget is about $2 billion.

So we're talking about a roughly 1% increase in the budget to make sure we make up the lost revenue for free school meals for all.

Thank you. Thank you. Further questions? Actually, I know the answer to this question. Okay, well, any. Any further questions? Okay, we're going to move on to the next bill. Next bill is Senate Bill 1220 SD2HD1.

First, we have DCCA Division of Consumer Advocacy with comments.

Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, thank you.

Hawaii Public Utilities Commission with comments. Thank you. Hawaii Gas in support.

Good afternoon, Chair. Vice Chair, My name is Nathan Nelson. On behalf of Hawaii Gas, appreciate the opportunity to speak today. Members of the Committee as well. I wanted to just take a step back here quickly. And first, this bill is really the product of collaboration between the Division of Consumer Advocacy and the Public Utilities Commission.

And the amendments that are currently in the bill reflect basically their concerns to be addressed. And so in its current iteration, it does in fact, include all of those concerns that were raised by both the DCA and the consumer advocate, and we appreciate their cooperation and collaboration on this. Second, there's been a lot of testimony.

Not a lot. There's been testimony basically that I think kind of serves as a source of confusion about what this bill is and what this bill isn't. This bill is important because it's about process, it's not about product. And I think in our testimony, we try to delineate why it matters.

Rates are set in something called a General rate case, but for companies like ours that are not in rate cases, frequently it can serve as a barrier.

For example, we're completing a rate case this year, and so it's typically another six to seven years before we'll be back to be able to set rates or establish a renewable natural gas tariff. And a tariff is another word for rate. It's not like the Trump tariffs or anything like that. It's about rate setting.

So that piece of it is important. The third piece is this is an accelerated process, but there are controls in place. And what I mean by that is you can't use this process if, for example, you know, it increases cost to other customers. That's one of the things that we agreed to on the front side.

The other piece of it is that you can't use this if it's not voluntary. So you can't force it down someone's throat. Someone has to want to buy renewable natural gas. And in that regard, the voluntary nature of the tariff are things that were important to us as a company.

So it's an accelerated process that's not tied to a rate case that allows you to establish a rate outside of a rate case. And that's critically important. The other piece is that I've heard some testimony to the effect that this is going to create a windfall for the utility. That's not true. It's a process.

It's about approving a new rate. And the Public Utilities Commission gets to decide whether or not it's just reasonable and in the public interest. I think that that's critically important. It's the same standard that would be applied in a rate case.

The other piece of the fence is this doesn't restrict the amount of information that the Public Utilities Commission can ask for. We have to go submit an application and say, this is why we think it's important. This is why we think it matters. This is why we think it's just and reasonable.

And the Public Utilities Commission gets to say yes or no. More importantly, everybody that has concerns about it has an opportunity to intervene in the case itself. And so it provides a forum essentially for people that may have concerns about it to get involved with the proceeding itself and share their concerns.

And at the end of the day, a renewable natural gas tariff has to be just reasonable and in the public interest. One of the other things that I heard is that this bill is somehow going to, you know, somehow going to increase cost to customers. Right? That there's going to be some type of windfall.

It's not about that. It's about a process. There's no specific mention of any projects, no automatic approval mechanisms, anything else like that. It's simply a means to allow us to get a renewable natural gas rate in place that's not tied to a rate case. So that's what we're trying to solve for when you take a step back.

So with that, I appreciate an opportunity to testify in strong support on behalf of this bill. And I'm available for questions.

Thank you. That's all the people who indicated they would be joining us. Also testimony and support from nine other organizations. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom questions?

Yes. Hello, I'm on Zoom here to testify and support. Yeah. Thank you. My name is Yannick Serez, Legislative Affairs Manager with the Coalition for Renewable Natural Gas.

We advocate for the sustainable development and utilization of renewable natural gas so that present and future generations have access to domestic clean sources of fuel and energy. We strongly support SB 1220. This legislation would accelerate renewable gas deployment while upholding rigorous consumer protection standards and maintaining proper oversight.

As stated, it's important because current regulations could delay consumer access to renewable options until 2030 or beyond. And we believe that this legislation comes at a critical Juncture when federal support for renewable energy initiatives faces a lot of uncertainty, we respectfully urge the Committee to pass this bill. Thank you. And I yield my time.

Okay, thank you. We'll move to questions. Members, any questions? Okay. Representative Kusch, thank you.

For Gas company. Thank you for your description. So, as I understand it, this is just kind of a preemptive move. So that's on the books during this rate setting period. But you don't have any projects or what?

You must have some conceptual idea or is there any projects locally or this would be renewable gas that's shipped over or.

Yeah, that's a great question. I appreciate that. So there's something called an integrative resource Plan and an irp. That proceeding answers precisely that question. And I've heard it brought up before. In 2020, we were instructed to go into an IRP. I think it was 2020. It might have been 2021.

Apologies, but we, we were instructed to go in an IRP proceeding. And in that IRP proceeding, questions get asked precisely like that. There's a mandate out chapter 225p. How are you going to make it? How are you going to meet the state's carbon neutrality goals? And in that plan, it's a very comprehensive plan.

I believe it's around 1300 pages. We mark out about four to five different pathways in order to achieve that. One of them involves punching the gas on rng. One of them involves punching the gas on hydrogen. One involves the status quo. One of them involves incorporation of more biofuels.

But all of these types of things, proposals that we've put forward are currently pending before the Public Utilities Commission. So we'll have answers for that hopefully this summer. There's the discovery process that's happening right now in that proceeding.

And I think that the Commission under its current iteration will probably issue its decision in order on that pathway somewhere at the end of the year, potentially in the beginning of 2026. Six.

Okay. But you can't disclose anything at this time.

The. The challenge with disclosing project specific information right now is that it gets market signals. If you'd like a briefing on that privately, I'd be happy to do it.

Gotcha. No, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Further questions? Okay, thank you. We're going to move on to the next bill. Senate Bill 1269 SD1HD2.

First up, we have the Department of Hawaiian Homelands in support.

Thank you. We have WICA Consulting in support. Thank you. Life of the Land in support. On Zoom not present. We have Energy Justice Network in opposition. On Zoom not present. Ulupono Initiative in support.

Good afternoon, Chair. Vice Chair. Members of the Committee, Micah Munikata here on behalf of Ulupono Initiative. We'll send in our testimony and support. We do have a couple of comments regarding the current draft before us. We do have some concerns around the language around the radius restrictions that are attached to this particular measure.

I think it's a bit premature in the fact that we're still trying to explore where the resource is. It in no way means that we are saying that we should bypass any kind of public comment or input. We definitely believe there should be robust community involvement in that process.

But doing it at this point is probably a little premature. We also do think that if the funds are available, we'd like to see this program funded at a lot higher rate. I think this bill contemplates three to $6.0 million.

I think the actual dollar amount to truly explore this resource across the islands is probably closer to $50 million. I think that we are also very supportive of the true exploration. Yes, there's a lot of studies and groups that we could meet and talk about. But we want to see some action with this particular funding.

So we are supportive of seeing that particular funding go towards exploration. Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you. We have Pele Defense Fund in opposition on Zoom.

Aloha. Terry Napiahi with Pele Defense Fund. I appreciate this time to give a testimony in regards to SB1269. Please do not appropriate tax taxpayers dollars on a bill that does not guarantee sustainable energy. With geothermal exploratory drilling from private companies, you should not take the risk of losing the monies because of the following reasons.

Number one, the state already lost $80 million of taxpaying dollars in the 80s when Congressman Danoy initiated the biggest push for geothermal. When the state wanted to own their own utilities companies. 20 geo plants for 35 megawatts, pushing an undersea cable to Oahu. It failed.

Exploratory drilling requires an EIS, a CIA and a Section 106 because it triggers a cultural sensitivity impact. Moku Okawi is The home of Pele and the act of drilling is desecration. Amendment 1 Religious Rights Hawaii Constitution Article 12, Section 7. It will take just one religious practitioner to litigate this issue. Mahalo.

Thank you. We have Ann Chung in support. Thank you. We have Tara Rojas in opposition on Zoom.

One moment.

Tara. Hello. Hi.

Hi. Sorry. Okay. I just want to testify regarding the SB 1269. I called the Chair and Vice Chair as well as Members yesterday regarding all of the information why this. This bill needs to be stopped and deferred and. Or just completely killed because of the environmental health. Yeah. Detrimental effects.

And the Puna community is suffering as they are in downwind of the only geothermal in existence now. There are studies that have been done already since the blowout. Since PGV has been in existence. And regardless of the other testimony saying that there is no harm. There is harm. You can look up the Goddard and guarded.

And so I really hope you guys have discussion afterwards regarding this that you don't just. Okay, every. Let's take a vote and I pass through. No, you really have to stop because if not you are going to be responsible, you know, for the. The effects on people and the environment. So Goddard and Goddard did their environmental assessment.

USGS have as well geothermal experts. And right now there are Puna community again people suffering. And the cause of the blowout in the 1991 was of their flow testing which they also just did recently in March 26th. And it sent you know, really panic in the community.

They were making sure to tell each other do not leave the house, close your windows and do you all have your gas masks? Yeah. So in addition to that there is a suit, a lawsuit currently regarding specifically PGB in. I believe it's like the Supreme Court right now.

So another reason why this needs to stop as well as PGV really not adhering to not even providing information of 40 plus years of their existence. Saying that it's proprietary information. So they're not releasing air quality data. Yeah. And not even releasing to like USGS everything. So I'm not sure if I'm hearing you correctly.

If you're saying anything but just you need to stop this. It cannot be profit over people. It needs to be people over profit. It cannot be profit over the environment. It needs to be the environment over profit. And the people pushing this are people benefiting. Yeah. Profiting off of this. So money talks. Money can push things through.

Money can sway information and people's thoughts. But you are all working for the people, the constituents. Not for again businesses nor agencies nor entities who have the money. And again, I'm going to benefit off this if you. I'm just going to end this with this. If you all are affected by the vogue happening right now.

That vog includes the chemicals that they're injecting which is causing you Know these, like these eruptions and which is coming towards us.

So if you're having a hard time breathing now, can you imagine when it's by in your area where they're gonna do these so called quote explorations in which after you do this is not gonna go back ever. So leave the AINA alone. Yeah. Protect the AINA, protect the VAI, protect the people over profits.

So again, you all need to really discuss this. Look up the things I mentioned, read previous testimonies as well as calling letting you all know your office people to give you the information, have a discussion on this to stop, defer and just kill this bill. So we cannot have geothermal. We need air to breathe.

We're already in issues with the water and with the Governor not pointing the water Commission person now evidence like removing the Molokai candidates. So there's so much Hewa that if you just rely on the indigenous. Ike, we need that to survive in this island. Yeah. That we live in. So again, please have discussion.

Stop, defer and kill this geothermal bill. It's people, environment over profit. Mahalo.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us today. Also testimony with comments from DBED organizations, three other organizations in support, three in opposition, one providing comments and then six other individuals providing testimony and support. Two in opposition and two more with comments. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify, please come forward.

Please just state your name and position for the record.

Hi, my name is Kaylin Bray. Sorry, I submitted my written testimony two minutes after 2pm yesterday. So I apologize. I am a student at UH Manoa and a member of Students for Justice for Palestine at UH Manoa. And we strongly oppose this bill.

I would like to start out by reminding the Committee that there is an active unprecedented geothermal injunction right now in the intermediate Supreme Court against the State of Hawaii Department of Health, PGV and others. Continuing to ignore Kanaka Community Voices is a violation under UN law under the IOL Convention 169, which is being actively documented.

Placing the geothermal development plan under the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, which does not have a focus on geological and geophysical studies, not only raises concerns about the inadequacy or the adequacy Sorry.

Of expertise in managing such projects, but also raises immediate, immediate commercial viability which that prioritizes profit over genuine scientific inquiry and the well being of community Members.

As was talked about earlier back in the 80s, the projected cost was 4 billion to develop these resources by means that only federal and foreign investors could finance such projects, further distancing local communities from decision making, a projected cost that has immensely increased since then.

The bill limits the scope of counties with populations of 300,000, failing to consider the broader implications of geothermal energy on our state. The energy source places an unreasonable burden on Native Hawaiians.

And this development threatens sacred lands and the rainforest that provides vital resources not only for traditional and cultural practices, but also on all the natural resources that provide vital resources. I said resources a bunch of times. Sorry for the whole island itself. Geothermal energy has shown itself to be an exorbitant, dangerous, toxic and unstable source of electricity.

We have seen past failures and safety. Sorry. We have seen past failures in the safety committees from geothermal developers like PGV which have failed multiple times to notify neighbors of excessive hydrogen sulfide emissions. This record of negligence highlights the risks to public safety that accompany geothermal projects.

We and the environmental community strongly oppose the destruction of our rainforest and emphasize that stopping this development is a top priority. Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you. And we did receive your testimony.

Okay, thank you.

Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom, questions?

Okay, thank you. Moving on to the next bill. Senate Bill 1602 SD1HD1.

Okay. We have the Department of Land and Natural Resources in support.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair. Members of the Committee. Kira Kahohane, DLNR Commission on Water Resource Management. Mahalo Nui for hearing this bill. We are strongly in support of this bill and the creation of a Keo Home Monitoring Pilot program. Keauhou is complex both in its geology and its history with the Water Commission.

This program will enable us to proactively study and address the impacts of groundwater development on groundwater dependent ecosystems. To carry out the Commission's responsibility to balance the use and the protection of groundwater resources. We're requesting $200,000 in each year in operating funding to enable continued monitoring, study, community outreach and education.

And the CIP funding we're requesting 4 million will support two deep monitor wells to study groundwater resources in Keauhou, including potential study of the mysterious and little understood deep confined aquifer which rests beneath the salt water. So I won't take up any more of your time. I'm available for questions.

And thank you so much again for hearing this bill. Mahalo.

Thank you. Department of Hawaiian Homelands in support. Thank you. Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation in support.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair Members. Dean Minakami with HHFDC. We are in strong support of this measure. We have a master plan community on HHFDC lands in North Kona Kamukhana villages which provide 1600 homes which has been stalled for more than 10 years due to lack of potable water.

And I'll just note, just today there was a measure on the CWORM agenda that was withdrawn because of community concerns about the development of a well that would provide water for this development. So this monitoring program is badly needed to provide data to show what the impacts of water groundwater development will be in North Kona.

So we strongly urge this Committee to pass this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us. Also testimony and support from nelha, Department of Water Supply, County of Hawaii, four organizations and two individuals. Is there anybody else wishing to testify? Please just state your name and position for the record.

Hello, I'm Stanford Carr, CEO of Stanford Car Development and the principal of SCD Kamakona LLC which is the master developer for the villages at Kamakana. It's as Executive Director Dean Minakami spoke. It's a 1600 unit master plan community, over 273 acres including an elementary school and 6 acres of neighborhood commercial.

We have been paralyzed from proceeding with building homes due to the water. We have drilled Kaupa well number four. We were scheduled as Ms. Kohane brought to your attention this morning hearing for the Otawell which was removed from the agenda pending a resolution of an alternative monitoring plan.

The funds in Senate Bill 1602 is critical for us to poise this master plan community forward which will provide much need needed affordable rental as well as entry level for sale housing for West Hawaii.

So I strongly urge and ask for your support to approve the funding of this vital program necessary so that we can proceed with the development. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, questions? Members? All right, thank you. We're going to move on to the next bill. Senate Bill 382.

We have the Department of Transportation in support on Zoom. Department of Transportation. Okay, we'll circle back. State Procurement Office in support. Thank you. Circling back to Department of Transportation on Zoom. Okay, they were in support.

Also testimony from the City and County of Honolulu, Department of Budget and Fiscal Services in opposition and the General Contractors Association of Hawaii with comments. That's all the written testimony we received. Anybody in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Questions? Moving on to the next bill. Senate Bill 1252 SD2HD1.

First we have the Executive Office on Aging in support on Zoom. Present Alzheimer's Association Hawaii in support.

Chair Yamashita, Vice Chair Takenouchi and Members of the Committee. I'm Koby Chalk with the Alzheimer's Association in support of this bill. Just a little of the background here. About two thirds of providers have not received care, I guess, training on care for people living with dementia and Alzheimer's.

And about one third of those are not even comfortable with making a diagnosis of Alzheimer's. And with the new treatments that are on the market now that slow down the progression of the disease, it's urgent that we start detecting people early enough so that they can do something about it, if not the treatment, at least care planning.

So we're in support of this bill and here for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everybody. We have checked in. Also University of Hawaii system in support and Hawaii Primary Care Association. Anybody in the room wishing to testify? Okay. Do we have. Okay. Yeah. University of Hawaii System on Zoom.

Good afternoon. I'm Dr. Kamal Masaki. I'm chair of the Department of Geriatric Medicine at the John A. Burns School of Medicine. I stand on the testimony provided by Jabsom in support of this bill, and I'm available to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room? Anybody else on ZOOM wishing to testify? Yes. Please go ahead. State your name and position and proceed. Thank you.

Thank you. Daintry Bartoldus, Executive Director for the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities. And we stand in strong support. I apologize that our testimony did not make it in. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Anybody else on Zoom?

Okay, questions? Okay, we're going to move on to the next bill. Senate Bill 1502 SD1HD1.

First, we have the University of Hawaii system in support.

Chair Yamashita, Members of the Committee, I'm Denise Conan. I'm the dean of the College of Social Sciences. I'm here with Jerris Grove, and we stand in full support on our written testimony. Happy to answer any questions.

Honorable Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, my name is Frank Kudo. I'm Professor of Accounting and Business Division Chair at the Cyber School at UH West Oahu. I stand in full support of our written testimony and thank you very much for considering making Hawaii safe with cybersecurity.

Thank you. We have the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii in support. Thank you. We have GreenPeace Hawaii in opposition. On Zoom.

Aloha. Dave Mullinix with GreenPeace Hawaii. We stand in strong opposition. US Military doesn't need any more help from Hawaii taxpayers. Tight budgets to recruit students into career opportunities and their services. Military spends $850 billion in 2025. That's how much money they're going to get.

They we spend more than the next 10 countries combined on our military and eight of which are our allies. The military has a very robust recruitment system here in Hawaii. There are 47 military recruitment state offices across the state. We also have job fairs at high schools and college campuses.

The DOD spends $640 million on recruitment advertising as I used in movie theaters waiting to see films. They have advertising saying be all what you can be enjoying. The military high school counselors and college counselors are very aware of the career opportunities of the military. And everyone knows that the military will pay for your college education.

We're all aware the state has a very tight budget this year. The federal budget is also being cut, putting essential services, social services from losing money. We know the State of Hawaii economy is predominantly based on income from tourism and military and in the end we are siloing our youth into two career path choices.

To ensure a robust economic future for Hawaii, we must expand our opportunities in other fields. Federal funds are being cut under the Administration except for military spending which will be increased. The state shouldn't be directing its limited funds to feed and into the most well funded agency in the US in the history of the world.

Actually if UH wants an even stronger DOD present at the University, they should seek federal funding, not asking Hawaii taxpayers to pay for this. Thank you very much. UH, have a wonderful day and a beautiful Hawaii night.

Thank you. We have Sherry Pollack in opposition on zoom. Aloha, can you hear me?

Yes, please proceed. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Sherry Pollack and I'm in strong opposition to SB 1502 which would create a pipeline for students to enter the so called defense sector. A recent article makes clear what the defense sector thinks of the people of Hawaii and their complete and utter disrespect.

Before considering giving even a penny to them, consider this excerpt from that recent Star Advertiser article. When asked if the Pentagon would actively pursue promised environmental cleanup and cultural preservation programs specific to Hawaii under this new Administration, the response was that the Secretary of Defense is single minded when it comes to the US Military.

He has said over and over that the mission of the US Military is war fighting and that Hawaii residents should expect to see environmental and cultural programs drastically scaled back and argued most were the result of of congressional mandates that warped military priorities and distracted the military from war fighting with an emphasis on lethality.

This from the entity responsible for poisoning thousands of families and contaminating our sole source aquifer on Oahu. To them, we are simply collateral damage. Please let that sink in. DOD does not need any more of our tax dollars. In Federal fiscal year 2025, they had 1.38 trillion distributed amongst its six subcomponents. That's trillions of dollars.

Yet trillions apparently are not enough. They want even more of our tax dollars. That's obscene. And why are we pushing our young people into careers that feed the war machine instead of careers in good paying green jobs that will actually help make a better future for our local community and the planet?

Funding this measure would be a poor use of taxpayer dollars and disrespectful to each and every one of us who call Hawaii home. You know, there, there's a lot of important programs that need help in our community. We've heard about them in this very hearing. I'd like to put in a plug for SB 1300.

We need to Fund things like school meals for all and we won't have the funds to do that if we waste it on Boondock Goes like this project again. Let's put our money, our limited money, where our values are. Please hold this measure. Thank you very much.

Thank you. We have Crystal Diaz in support. That's everyone who indicated that they would be joining us. Also testimony in support from three organizations in opposition. From three organizations. Two individuals in support and four individuals in opposition. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify, please please just state your name and position for the record.

Hi, my name is Jerris Grove. I'm the Director of the Boondoggle. I wanted to say a few things about the program, just both to clarify and also actually in great respect for the passion that the other people spoke out against it. It's not a military program. It's for civilians to be able to enter the intelligence field.

And I want to say a few things about why I think that's very important. The most absolutely life changing decisions for the United States in the next 50 years will be made in Hawaii. Those positions, those intelligence positions will be billets in the State of Hawaii. Whether or not this bill passes.

This bill is about whether or not Hawaii I residents are represented amongst those decision makers. Right. It is not the preference of the current Department of Defense to hire locally for intelligence for a number of reasons.

The most important one is that our students, while they are bright, while they have skills, while they could influence the decisions to be made in these rooms, they don't have the security clearance to apply for these jobs. Very short windows for hiring.

Our program helps make sure that their skills are placed in internships during the four year process that they're undergraduates as well as while they are in high school. If this is something they're interested in so that they can compete in this job market. So this isn't about bringing more military to the island.

It's about making sure that we're represented in making those critical decisions. And also that we have good civilian long term paying jobs where students could spend their whole lives in Hawaii trying to make, I think, a better series of policy decisions. Right.

I think if you're wondering why we should be funding it and the DOD may not continue to Fund it, it's because we are a diversity driven program. Our goal is to make sure that everyone, even including those in the outer islands, have access to these jobs.

That was not seen as a DOD priority because of the changes against. And I speak strongly to the fact that diversity matters in national security. It matters that we have people who understand Chinese. Last thing, and I promise I'll Shut up.

In 1962, when the Cuban Missile crisis happened, we didn't launch nuclear weapons because somebody who is intimately knowledgeable about Russia, the US Ambassador to Russia said the Russians love their children too. It stopped that process.

If we want to have people in the room that understand that China is another country, that we need to be engaging, not necessarily just fighting.

If we want to understand how Pacific Islanders need to represent themselves in Oceania and decisions that will affect their lives in places like Guam, we need to make sure that those students have the national security clearance to be in the room to advocate for their communities and shape a national security policy that represents our entire country and not just those in D.C.

that understand that to be a narrow set of security interests. And I make myself available for any questions about the program.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room, anybody on Zoom wishing to testify?

Okay, questions, Members?

Representative Grandine, question for Dr. Grove.

Thank you.

Thank you for adding some nuance. You answered a lot of my questions. But I just wanted to. Wanted to ask. So you have not yet sought federal funding for this?

No, that's how we've been functioning for the last five years.

Okay, that clears it up. Thank you. Okay.

Okay. Thank you for the questions. Okay, moving on to the next bill sent. Nope. Represent.

For. For UH, Denise. So if we Fund this program with General funds, what are like the implications for future federal funding for UH.

That feels like a stumping kind of question. The, the. If you Fund this by Program. The focus of this program is to provide faculty and also administrative support, programmatic supports to help position our students for competition in these intelligence sector jobs.

I don't see that as directly leading to an impact in federal funding and I guess I'm not quite sure what you're asking because a previous testifier just mentioned that diversity is important in the intelligence community.

And with our current Administration seeing concerns and sharing issues to that, I, in the next four years I wonder what that could potentially put UH at risk for as far as. Yeah, finance. Okay.

Well, I mean I, I think the previous speaker did talk about this as a diversity program. Really. Hawaii is a diverse population. Our students are have their diversity.

I don't, I don't see this as directly being involved with the more the federal political environment which is putting universities under fire under the situation of dei, if that's what your question is around Executive orders and so forth.

I do think that the federal support for higher education is something that our President, you know, asked that she be the main spokesperson for.

Is she supportive of this program?

Yes.

Is this part of their priority?

Yes. Interesting. Thank you. Yeah.

Any further questions?

Questions?

Okay, thank you. We'll move on to the next Bill. Senate Bill 299 SD2 HD1.

First we have the University of Hawaii system in support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. My name is Dr. Kelly Withey. I administer this program at the John A. Burns School of Medicine. I am going to stand in strong support. But more importantly, over 800 of your constituents have been funded by this program program in the last year and a half.

And over 1700 of your constituents are still on the waiting list and I bet they would support it too. Happy to answer any questions that you guys have.

Thank you everybody. I have checked in also testimony and support from the Office of the Governor, Department of Health, Hawaii State Center for Nursing, State Council on Mental Health, OHA 14 organizations all in support. Is there anybody in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, questions. All right, thank you. We're going to move on to the next bill. Senate Bill 850SD2HD1.

We have the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities in support.

Thank you. Daintry Bartoldus, Executive Director for the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities. And we are in strong support this the State Council. We are created to advocate for and improve and protect the lives of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities in our state. However, we lack the data.

In order to do a very good job of this, further research is needed to understand the health disparities of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their social detriment, excuse me, of health.

Accurate data will also help the state provide culturally appropriate health care, address barriers to health care access, reduce health disparities, increase employment opportunities, and support individuals with developmental and intellectual disabilities to live the healthy lives in our community that they can.

We're requesting funding for a two year study project and we've been working closely with the University of Hawaii to help us with this budget. And so that's what our request is. Thank you so much for this opportunity to testify and I'm going to be available for questions.

Thank you. Executive Office on Aging in support on Zoom not present. That's everybody I have checked in. Also testimony and support from the Office of Wellness and Resilience, University of Hawaii System Disability and Communication Access Board, two organizations and one individual. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify, please come forward.

State your name and position for the record.

Aloha, Angela Melody Young, testifying in strong support of the legislation. So this study with the University of Hawaii can help with addressing social determinants of disabilities.

For example, which communities or demographics or people groups or ethnic minorities have higher levels of disabilities to reduce the health disparities and to prepare to be able to predict how to address those communities. Whether it's a physical, intellectual, behavioral or emotional development is lacking in a certain population, then this study can really help with planning and navigating.

And so within this legislation, it has a bunch of really good goals and yet to be considered is to help with comprehensive planning, the Social Security Act, which is from the SSDI office, to help with what's federally administered to cover illnesses and disabilities.

So, for example, for the discussion that was heard today in the Senate, they went over eligibility criteria requirements to help more of those who are disabled and by working with the Social Security Act to set a standard to improve collaboration and to be more in sync with the state planning for disabilities as well as the federal office.

It could be very helpful to amend this legislation to include the Social Security Act and what it refers to within the SSFI. Illnesses and conditions. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room? Anybody on Zoom wishing to testify?

Questions? All right, thank you. Moving on to the next bill, Senate Bill 71 SD2HD1.

We have the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation in support. Thank you. Hawaii Public Housing Authority in support. Thank you. Holomua Collaborative in support. Okay, that's everybody I have checked in. Also comments from Department of Budget and Finances and Finance, four organizations in support and one providing comments. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify?

Anybody on Zoom?

Great questions. All right, thank you. Moving on to the next bill, Senate Bill 1669 SD2HD2.

We have the Department of Hawaiian Homelands in support.

Thank you. Hawaii State Energy Office with comments. Thank you. Office of Planning and Sustainable Development with comments.

Mary Alice Evans with the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. We have strong concerns about this measure. We feel it's duplicative with the Hawaii Community Development Authority, which already has legislatively delegated responsibilities along with the Tod Council for Transit Oriented Development, and has the tools to accomplish what this bill is hoping to accomplish. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. That's everybody who indicated they would be joining us today. Also, testimony with comments from Department of Budget and Finance, support from ampo, two other organizations, and three individuals. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, questions? Members, thank you. We're going to move on to the next bill, 717SD1HD1.

Okay. First, we have the Department of Human Resources Development in opposition.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm Brenna Hashimoto, Director of the Department of Human Resources Development. I'll stand on our written testimony in opposition to this measure, but I would like to point out two important issues. First of all, in 2000, the state changed the terminology used for separations to to discharge.

So all separations, whether they're for misconduct or for administrative reasons, are now referred to as discharges. So to allow an exempt employee to grieve a discharge would be problematic because as we know, many all exempt employees have temporary appointments. So at the end of their appointment, there's no expectation that that appointment will continue.

And to allow them to then grieve, it would just frustrate government operations and cost unnecessary expenses if we were to have to arbitrate those complaints. I would also like to point out that exempt employees already have an appeal process through the internal complaint process, which is provided by each Department.

So they do have an avenue to have their, quote, unquote grievance heard within that Department. I'm available for any questions.

Thank you. We have HGA in support.

Thank you.

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, Members, Nui Sebast here with HGA. We'll stand on our testimony and strong support of this measure. I do want to emphasize that we have seen a significant increase in the use of exempt positions and employees over the past few years.

This bill would really allow exempt employees to grieve a suspension or discharge to address a concern that was made. We have no objection should this Committee, if this bill is to move forward to change the word discharge determination available to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you.

UPW in support on behalf of UPW, Chair, Vice Chair, thank you for this Opportunity.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us. Also, comments from the city and County of Honolulu, Department of Human Resources, and support from Hawaii State, AFL, CIO. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom, questions? All right, Representative Kusch.

HGA, please. Thank you. Did this matter come up during the subject matter Committee hearings? The difference in language that was outlined by Human resources, the use of termination or discharge? No, it has not. So this is the first time that's been surfaced?

Yeah, to my knowledge, but at least in Committee hearing, it wasn't brought up in discussion.

Okay. And am I correct also in that the majority of the exempt positions are like, technical positions that are hard to fill it Engineering, and that then they don't have to be in, like, salary bands. They can push their, you know, is that kind of. Am I in the right direction there?

Understanding that correctly, generally. So for exempt positions, they are given latitude in their salary, so they don't have to abide by the civil service salary schedule. In terms of, I guess, the General makeup of exempt positions, that I'm not too sure.

But what I will say is that at least through previous measures, we have seen attempts to exempt employees that we feel don't fit the current definition of exempt employees, which we. Which is temporary or unique and stuff.

Okay, thanks. Yeah. Jerry, if you may. Sorry, Please. Bren Hashimoto, please. Thank you. I feel like I was hoping both you guys could come up at the same time, but to the same question. Do you. Do you feel like these exempt positions are mostly technical positions or not?

You know, this rise in the number of exempt positions, or is it just Department heads or people who have a finite scope of work?

So there are a number of reasons that a position could be exempted. Oftentimes we find that it's because it's temporarily funded. It's like a project or a demonstration project. That's one of the statutory reasons that a position can be exempted. So the default is that all state and state positions are civil service. That's what the statute provides.

That's what the Constitution provides. However, there is a laundry list of reasons why a position could be exempted. And so oftentimes they're because they're projects. They're not necessarily all technical or are difficult to fill or highly skilled. Some of them are just the nature of the project. It could be clerical, it could be blue collar.

It could be a whole host of different types of jobs that are exempt.

Okay. And so you just now discovered after subject matter Committee that this language disparity between termination and discharge could present a problem when someone's like, for lack of a better term, contractor use, project period is completed.

We've raised this issue previously in previous hearings as well.

Okay, thank you.

Okay. For the questions. Representative.

Hi. Sorry. Brina. Brina, for you. Hi. I'm not done with you yet. It's me. Thank you. In your written testimony, you referenced an internal complaint procedure.

Yes.

Can you describe what that is?

It was part of Act 253 as well. In 2000, every Department was required to develop an internal complaint procedure. And the intent, although it's most often used for employment type issues, the complaint procedure is really for anything that doesn't have its own complaint procedure, if that makes sense. So it's really

the statutory language is very broad, and it could be. And it's for. Not just for employees, but it can be for members of the public as well, if you just have a general complaint.

The idea was to have a uniform process and forms that was readily accessible and easily understood so exempt employees can utilize that internal complaint procedure if they have concerns about the nature of their discharge from employment or suspension.

Okay, so other than employees, employee issues for that internal complaint procedures, what other kind of complaints have come up? If you can give examples.

Gosh, it could be literally anything, like, I didn't get my permit or, you know, the door was locked. It could be something very trivial, or it could be something very serious, serious about just a member of the public complaining about the operations of that Department. So it's.

It's really meant to cover anything that they want to raise to that Administration, and it culminates in a decision by the Director to either grant the remedy or not.

Okay. And so the decision is final by the Director?

Yes, only.

And the decision is not appealable. Okay, thank you. Can I ask. Call HD if they're still here. Hi. Thank you. Can you define or tell me what A. Because in this bill, it says grieve. So can you explain the grievance procedures? Right.

Thank you for your question, Representative. There's effectively three steps to the grievance process. Step one and step two, depending on the jurisdiction, we appeal to certain, I guess, authorities within the jurisdiction, so whether Department or to the human resource Department. And then there's step three.

Step three is if the union decides, we can proceed to arbitration where a decision is rendered by a neutral third or neutral arbitrator. I will mention that we feel that that is a much fairer process compared to the current internal complaint process. That's in place.

Okay. So for that grievance procedure, is there, is that appealable if somebody wasn't happy with the results?

Yes, you can appeal it through each step. Through each step. Yeah. Okay, thank you. At least. Yeah, the first two.

Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Further questions. All right, thank you. Moving on to the next bill. Senate Bill 280. I mean sorry, 828 SD1 HD1.

Department of labor and Industrial Relations in support. Thank you. We have the Hawaii State Fire Council in support on Zoom. Okay.

Not present. That's everyone who indicated that they would be joining us or checked in. Also testimony and support from Disability and Communication Access Board, Honolulu Fire Department, Hawaii Firefighters Association, HFFA Local 1463 and three individuals. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Any questions? Thank you. Moving on to the next bill—Senate Bill 855 SD1 HD1.

We have the Executive Office on Aging and Support on Zoom. Staff present. Hawaii Retirement Savings Board in support. Thank you. AARP Hawaii in support.

Aloha Chair Yamashita, Vice Chair Takenouchi, and Members. Kayla E. Lopez. And thank you, on behalf of our 135,000 members statewide. We really appreciate your scheduling this bill for hearing.

One of the things I think that's very important is this program is designed to—to help many of our working families, where people don't have a way to save for retirement through their payroll. This is meant to make that an easy process.

The concern for AARP is, if people do not save now, we're going to have Kupuna retiring into poverty. And that's what these projections have indicated. So, people need to have an easy way to save for retirement. The problem is, the Bill, as it was passed previously, had a voluntary component of people having to opt into a program.

There's no employer-funded program where you have your employees easily opting in, if you want to help them save for retirement. If you want to just kind of put something out there and look like you did something good—sure. But they aren't going to save.

By voluntarily saying I want to opt out enables the employees to say, you know what, yes, you're making it easy for me, but I don't want to save. Across the country, the opt out program has demonstrated at least 80% of employees who are offered the program choose to actually save. So that's a key piece.

So, as Alani spoke to, really appreciate the fact that the funding is going to be made available and has been—is in the Governor's Budget. Without the opt-out, there's two problems: one, Hawaii is the only state in the country where we have an opt-in.

So, our ability to enter into a compact with another state is pretty much eliminated without that opt-out program, as well as most contractors who provide the services will not take—will not even bother bidding on a program where people have to opt in.

And the reason for that is, they know too that very few people will do it. So again, you want 80% participation—opt-out is the way to go. Thank you so much for hearing this Bill. Appreciate it.

Thank you. We have Retail Merchants of Hawaii in opposition on Zoom—not present. Tax Foundation of Hawaii, with comments—not present. And he left. That's everyone who indicated that they would be joining us.

Also, testimony in support from Policy Advisory Board for Elder Affairs, Executive Office on Aging, three or three organizations, as well as one other organized organization in opposition, and 13 individuals in support. Anybody else wishing to testify in the room? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, questions. Members, Department of Labor Retirement Savings Board. Okay, this is technically a private sector benefit. So... And then, so the Department is requesting money for positions to administer. At some point in time, they are. And at some point, in time, like ERS, it should be a self-funded mechanism.

So with the residual income that will come out of investment or whatever. Right. At some point we have to build that into the system. Have you given that some thought?

Well, I was recently brought on board in December. So, right now I am trying to start up the program. There was funding provided by the Legislature for three positions, one of which I'm filling. I'm trying to establish the program by hiring and establishing the other two positions. So, we've not got to that stage yet.

Our intent, though, is if the Committee is inclined to change it to an opt-out program, that we be able to enter into compacts like Haley mentioned. The other state programs—the three initial state programs—are essentially self-sufficient.

Right now, based on a report put out by Georgetown—I believe on March 28—there are $2.2 billion in assets in state-funded retirement programs.

Okay.

I'm not sure if I answered your question.

Well, the question was, have you given any thought to the structure of putting that together? I mean, or do we have to make it up?

Well, I hope that once I have a staff that we can look at that.

Okay. I think, yeah, that's something that we definitely have to look at going forward. If we move this as an opt-out—like I said, it is a private sector benefit. Right. So, we have to think about how it can be self-sustaining at some point. If you can just think about it and get back to us.

Sure.

And we may put something in there at some point in time. I think I’ve got to go talk with subject matter on this.

Okay.

Okay.

If the Committee would like to see Georgetown again, just put out some information March 28, I can share that information with you as well.

Yeah, I think they came to talk to me, and I think I saw that one. Okay.

Okay, thank you.

All right. Thank you. Any further questions, Members? Okay, thank you. We're going to move on to the next bill. Senate Bill 353SD2HT2.

We have the Department of Human Services in opposition on Zoom.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. The Department of Human Services appreciates the intent and respectfully opposes the measure as drafted. DHS defers to the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency and other impacted departments and provides comments. DHS provides vital safety net services, provides benefits and services to vulnerable individuals and families as part of the public's response to emergencies.

We oftentimes receive an increase in call volume and request for assistance with food, financial assistance, Medicaid and such. We would like to emphasize, though and please note that the Department values and understands our Kuleana to provide public information in a timely manner. But request for individual assistance takes priority over requests for government records in times of emergency.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated that they would be joining us. But we also received comments from the Office of Information Practices. Opposition from Hawaii Emergency Management Agency. Three organizations in support and one individual also in support. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom, questions?

Thank you. Moving on to the next bill. Senate Bill 1377 SD2.

Hawaii Office of Veterans Services and Support. Veteran Services.

Thank you. Also support from one other individual. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay. Questions? Okay, thank you. Moving on to the next bill. Senate Bill 1009 SD2HD2.

We have the Department of Accounting and General Services with comments.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members Tony Benobisi on behalf of Comptroller Keith Regan. The Department stands on its testimony providing comments. We're available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Ulupono Initiative in support. Thank you. Hawaiian Electric in support. Thank you. That's everybody. I have checked in Members. Also testimony with comments from Department of Budget and Finance. Support from Disability and Communication Access Board. Yeah, support. And AMPO in support. As well as three organizations in support and one providing comments.

Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Please just state your name and position for the record.

Sorry, you're on 1009 correct? Yes. Yes. Hi. Sorry. Good afternoon Everybody. I'm Brian McCarran. On behalf of DCAB and Executive Director Kirby Shaw, we do support the intent of this bill. Illegally parked vehicles, inaccessible parking spaces and access aisles are common complaints that we hear from our permittees.

Enforcement is a challenge for the agencies which have the enforcement powers. Therefore, anything that can be done as a deterrent would be much appreciated. DCAB, however, did prefer the $100 fine amount that was proposed in the previous versions of this bill versus the $25 contained in the HD2. $25 is much less of deterrent.

While we do appreciate the concerns about accessible parking fines and their impact on low income people, the impact on people with disabilities who rely on these accessible parking spaces is far greater. And of course there's an easy way for a person to avoid having to pay a fine for illegally parking in an accessible parking space.

That's by parking in a non accessible parking space. So therefore, we would ask this Committee to amend the bill by restoring the fine to the $100 as originally proposed. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room? Anybody on Zoom wishing to testify?

Okay, questions? All right, thank you. Moving on to the next bill, Senate Bill 1638 SD2HD1.

Do we have Hui Aola, Maui County HEC and support on Zoom? Not present. Molokai Homestead Farmers alliance in support on Zoom? Not present. Do we have Kimberly Mikami Svetin in support on Zoom?

Hello? I'm trying. Sorry, I'm trying to do this. Can you hear me? Okay, thank you. My computer is giving me a lot of problems today. My name is Kimberly Mikami Svetin and I submitted some testimony in support for Senate Bill 1638 Draft 2. I stand by my testimony that I wrote and uploaded.

I would like to add to this testimony. In the last year or so we've started to see a number of our full time residents on Molokai relocate to other places in other states. Two of our friends recently relocated to Nashville, Tennessee.

They did not want to leave Molokai, but they were having difficulty with their flights and medical specialists off island. When people ask me what is the biggest crisis on Molokai?

I talk about access to health care and it's not just because I manage a small pharmacy, but because I see on a daily basis our people's health is not getting better. I really ask for this one time appropriation of $1.0 million from the General funds for this fiscal year.

I've been one person out of many who has Been stranded off island. I've even had to take a boat from Kaneohe to Molokai. So thank you again for your help and I really ask that you support Senate Bill 1638, draft two. Mahalo.

Thank you. That's everybody who indicated they might be joining us today. Also testimony and support from three other organizations and four individuals. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Yes, Vice Chair, if I may. Chair. Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Kurt Otoguro, Deputy Director for DOT. We have submitted testimony. I apologize if you got it late. We did want to offer comments with regard to the measure 1638. And we are also here to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. I don't have it on the list, so maybe just resubmit to make sure we get it in for the record.

Okay, Vice Chair.