Senate Standing Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts

Good afternoon. We're convening the joint committees on Transportation and Culture in the Arts and Energy and Intergovernmental affairs on our 3pm agenda here in State Capital Conference Room 2 to 4. We have a number with three measures on the agenda today.

So we'll be asking folks to limit their testimony to no more than two minutes to make sure we have an opportunity for everybody to get through. And I'll note there are also multiple hearings going on in other rooms as we speak. So our committees will be bouncing in and out between agendas.

After this joint agenda TCA, we have two other agendas and then our compatriots will be going into others as well. So that said, up first is House Bill 229 relating to transportation, which establishes a statewide speed restriction for motor vehicles under certain circumstances.

And Testifying first on 229, we have testimony from the City County of Honolulu Department of Transportation Services with comments, the Department of Parks and Recreation of City County Honolulu in opposition, the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization support. That's all the testimony we have on HB 229. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? If not, are there any questions?

Well, there's no one asked questions of. So with that, we'll move on to the next measure, House Bill 860 relating to liability, which specifies that a state or county that repairs or maintains a street of which the ownership or jurisdiction is in dispute between the state and county shall be immune from liability under certain circumstances.

And Testifying first on 860 is the Department of Transportation. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Robin Shishido with DOT and stand by our written testimonies as submitted.

Thank you. Next is the Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee Andre Telli on the Department of Land and Natural Resources. We'll stand on our submitted testimony.

Thank you. With comments, we also have testimony and support from Maui County Council Chair Alice Lee, Hawaii County Council Member Heather Kimball. And online we have the Hawaii State Association of Counties. Actually, sorry. In the room. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Nahilani Parsons here on behalf of the Hawaii State Association of Counties. We stand in our strong support of this measure.

Thank you. Testimony and support from Paailo Homestead Community Association, Hawaii Association for Justice. Good afternoon.

Hello. Chair. Members of the Committee Evan Oy, on behalf of the Hawaii Association for Justice, respectfully stand in opposition to this measure due to the broad immunity that it grants for these roads in Limbo. Also in addition to. It's included within our testimony.

But we feel that Those this measure or this, you know, issue has been resolved at multiple levels, especially in 2022 in which there was an Act 123, which highlighted and gave clarity to the county and the state's ability to condemn these roads in limbo. And in addition to that, it granted joint civil liability after the condemnation occurred.

So we feel as though this issue has been resolved and there's no need to provide overbroad immunity in this instance. You know, with that being said. Available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. And we have testimony, support from one individual. That's all the testimony that we've received on this measure. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on HB860? Seeing none. Are there any questions?

It's not just for HSAC, the HHA, I think testimony to raise concerns about liability and what it ultimately means if there is some sort of potential incident and who's responsible and how do you make people whole and all sorts of other stuff that could come up in those situations.

Reading through the history of this, which seems quite extensive, there have been a number of attempts as have been raised to address this. In 2017, Act 208 basically pushed for Oahu roads in limbo to be transferred to the counties ultimately and have that resolution didn't apply to neighbor islands.

Is that something at this point you guys would be open to in a similar manner, simply extending that act?

I believe so. I'd have to go back and check on behalf of the membership to be certain. But that is of the conversation that they'd be interested in.

Okay, thank you. And then real quick, for HHA if that's, if that's a potential path forward that the counties are good with, is that something you guys are good with as well?

I think as long as the immunity is removed from it, we'd be open to it. And, you know, extension of the 2017 piece of legislation would just, you know, allow the ability for the state to. To assign it to the county. So I think we'd be on board. Okay, thank you very much.

Okay. Any further questions? Seeing none. Thanks, everyone. Let's move on to the third measure on our agenda today, House Bill 1161, relating to transportation, which authorizes counties to take advantage of the similar mechanism to the state with respect to road usage charges. And testifying first on 1161 is the Department of Transportation.

Good afternoon again. This is Robin with DOT, and we stand by our written testimony. Thanks.

Thank you. In support. Up next is the Energy Office. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Member of the Committee. Chris Yunker for the Hawaii State Energy Office. We stand on our written testimony in support and are available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next is HSAC, once again. HB 1161, road usage charges.

Thank you, Chair. Nahelani Parsons on behalf of the Hawaii State Association of Counties, and we stand in strong support of this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. We also have testimony from the Kauai Office of the Mayor in support, Office of Hawaii County Clerk, Maui County Council Chair Alice Lee, City and County Honolulu Department of Customer Services, Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. Up next is the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. Thank you. Avis Budget Car Rental. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Avis Budget would like to offer a few amendments on this bill. We do support the intent. The first is it is very difficult for rental car companies to calculate based on a miles traveled formula on a transaction basis. So we are asking your consideration in specifying that rental car companies pay a flat fee.

Secondly, we ask consideration in removing plug in hybrid electric vehicles because it's unfair to have them pay for both vehicle miles traveled and also pay the gas tax. And for your consideration and delayed implementation date for rental car companies. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Next is Enterprise Mobility.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the Committee. Tiffany Yajima on behalf of Enterprise. Enterprise supports the intent of this measure and appreciates that this measure already contains pass through language for the rental car industry. We are working with the Department of Transportation on amendments and would support a flat fee for the state and county RUC programs and a delayed implementation date as well. But again, we're in discussions with the Department of Transportation, and really thank you for allowing us to work on that. Thank you.

We also have testimony from Hertz with comments. Servco Pacific, comments. Ulupono Initiative in support. Libertarian Party of Hawaii in opposition. Tax Foundation of Hawaii online.

Not available on Zoom, Chair.

Thank you. With comments. And then we also have testimony from one individual in support and two in opposition. And that's all the testimony that's been submitted on. Oh, there's Tax Foundation.

Yeah. Sorry I confused your staff. Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation of Hawaii. We did provide written comments. We'll stand on those. We do agree that there should be some relief for hybrid vehicles, which would be subject to both regimes under the current wording of current law and the bill. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you. That's everyone who had submitted testimony on HB 1161. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure? Seeing none. Are there any questions?

I have a question for Ms. Lum and Ms. Yajima. If they could both come up. Hello. Good afternoon. So I did see in both of your testimonies there a recommendation in terms of a flat fee for rental cars. So is that part of the ongoing conversation? Flat fee for rental cars. Okay. And then a delayed implementation for 2028. Okay.

So we're still in discussions.

Rather than a per mile usage charge, which could be a lot for a rental car.

Yeah. Because of the amount of transactions per transaction. Right. Yeah. It's very difficult, if not impossible to calculate.

And I think it's more so just a method of calculation. How exactly we would be able to pass that on to customers. That's really getting at the heart of the flat fee.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Any further questions? Seeing none. All right, thank you, everyone. That's the end of our three bills on our 3pm agenda, joint agenda. Note again, there are a number of hearings happening simultaneously here.

So what we'd like to do is, I think is for all three measures on our agenda today, House Bill 229, House Bill 860 and House Bill 1161, like to recommend deferring for decision making until Tuesday 3/18. That's this next Tuesday, 3:02 p.m. here in room 224.

And that'll give us some time to check with our counterparts and stakeholders and other. Other Members and figure out what's next. So with that, let me turn it over to the Committee on EIG thank you so much.

We'll be deferring as well for all three measures to Tuesday, March 18th at 3:02 p.m. in room 016 for the Committee on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs.

Thank you very much. With that, we are adjourned.

Good afternoon. We're convening the Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts here in State capitol conference room 224. On our 3:15 p.m. agenda. We have 1, 2, 3, 4 measures on the agenda today in order to. There is a lot of testimony that's been submitted.

So in order to get through all of it, we're going to ask everyone to limit their testimony to two minutes to make sure everyone has an opportunity to say their piece. With that, up first is House Bill 925. Oh, okay. You know what? We're gonna take a short recess while everyone streams in.

We'll be back in like hopefully one minute.

All right, we're reconvening the Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts here in State Capital Conference Room 224 on our 3:15pm agenda. Thanks for your patience. We want to give everyone a chance to file in and grab a seat. So as I mentioned before, we have several measures on our agenda.

So in order to make sure we have opportunity for everyone to get up and share their testimony, we're going to limit everyone's testimony to no more than two minutes. We'd ask folks to be as concise as possible and try and offer something new.

And make sure if you haven't submitted written testimony, please be sure to do so so we can have that all for the record.

That said, we're going to start with House Bill 925, House Draft 3, relating to the arts, which establishes a performing arts special Fund to be used for the coordination, planning, promotion, marketing and execution of performing arts events. Up first on House Bill 925 is the state foundation on Culture and the Arts. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Chair Lee, Members of the Committee, Karen Ewald. I'm the Executive Director of the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, and we stand in support of this measure. And I'm here to answer any questions.

Thank you. Next, we have testimony from the Department of Budget and Finance with comments, Hawaii State Department of Education. Comments, Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism.

Good afternoon. Thank you. Jim Lee and Members of the Committee. Rick Manayan, on behalf of DBEDT, and we stand by our working comments on behalf of this bill. Thank you.

Up next is the Hawaii Tourism Authority with comments. University of Hawaii System with comments, Hawaii Arts Alliance. Good afternoon.

Hello there. Good afternoon. My name is Gaye Humphrey, Executive Director for the Hawaii Arts Alliance. We stand on our written testimony in support of the bill with amendments. Thank you.

Thank you. We have one individual also in support. That's all the written testimony we have on this. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 925? Seeing none. Are there any questions?

All right, we're going to move on to House Bill 1378 relating to the State Foundation on Culture and Arts, which establishes the performing arts grants program and performing arts grant Special Fund clarifies the scope of state foundational culture and the arts response responsibilities to include the coordination, planning, promotion, marketing, execution of performing arts events and amends funding sources, et cetera, et cetera.

Before we go into this, I just want to say a few words on this because I think this is the bulk of what people have shown up here for today. If I'm not mistaken. And let me first start by saying, first of all, thank you guys for all taking the time to get involved and come in.

It's probably more people than we've seen typically, which is great.

There's a little bit of background because we've had this discussion sort of before last year and in previous years, and reading through at least the testimony that's been submitted that's written over the last 24 hours or so, the themes seem pretty consistent largely around preserving funding and support for the arts.

And I'm sure we'll hear a lot about that in just a minute here, once we start hearing from folks. But I wanted to clarify a couple things.

I've been speaking with some of our colleagues and others and want to be clear about at least speaking for myself and I think with respect to this bill, what the intent here is today. So number one, I don't think it's anybody's intention here to cut back funding for arts programming. You know, anything related of the sort.

In fact, we've been pushing for several years now, or actually a lot longer than that, to increase access, increase capacity, increase various things into new areas such as performing arts and things like that, that we probably should have done a long time ago.

That said, one of the issues that we've been facing, obviously, which I think precipitates a lot of the anxiety, I think, that we all feel, including myself, is uncertainty at the federal level, especially with federal funds coming into the state that support a lot of the various things that we all rely on, not only arts, but education, healthcare and so on and so forth.

So we know that we are under a microscope like never before on the state side.

The way that we allocate and spend our funds and how that is set up is one of those things that is very often technical and often difficult to really wrap your head around because it's such a large budget, such a large process, and such a long history of law that's written in 85 different places.

And so I say this because one of the things that has become apparent in the last, certainly in the last few years is, and we've been aware of it before, is that right now we have been one of the most fantastic examples in the country of raising money for arts.

We were the very first in the country with a works of arts Special Fund funded by bond financing out of construction projects. We became the model and have been the model for the rest of the country, which has been astounding.

And the challenge that we face now is that that mechanism we created, the way that money is used means that when we spend money on a construction project and get a percent of that that goes into the works of art Special Fund, which we then use to, or traditionally have used to not only acquire art, Commission art, pay for positions, to manage art, and a slew of other things that sure, we'll hear about today.

Those purposes are in a gray area outside the very clear legal, I think, guardrails for what bond financed dollars can be used for. And that has been sort of the crux of the discussion that we've been having over the last few years.

Because traditionally you can only fund things that have a physical capital expenditure, typically not positions, typically not some of the other things that fall into a gray area that now is under scrutiny not only here in Hawaii, but in states around the country.

And one of the big fears that we are all grappling with collectively in Hawaii, in all sectors is the loss of federal support, the loss of federal funding.

And not just in the arts community, of course, but as I'd mentioned, in our schools, in healthcare services for regular people, for our environment, for conservation, for invasive species work, for all the things that we are having these hearings about across pretty much every issue era you can imagine.

So the sort of genesis of this discussion today focuses not only around scientific of the performing arts stuff, which I've so far read a ton of great things and support for expanding, but also around trying to better clarify the guardrails around the bond finance dollars that are under such scrutiny around the country.

Because if we become as a state the target of that kind of scrutiny, it can jeopardize not only the federal support we have for the arts, but the federal support we have in all these other areas.

And as we all know, we already don't have enough resources and support in the state to fund basic health care, to fund better schools, to fund all the things. We're always in a compromised position where we're trying to get as much as we can and maintain as much support as possible.

So today that is sort of the genesis of this and getting into some of the details because I really want to thank you guys because some of the testimony has been, the written testimony so far has been so fantastically like well researched, more so than I think we typically see getting into the mechanics of how these things work.

Currently we have 1% of our Special Fund, or excuse me, our capital improvement dollars that goes into a Special Fund that is used to fund the stuff.

As I've mentioned, what the bill does just to get around, I think a lot of the assumptions out there based on all kinds of other things and certainly from years past and different proposals, is maintain the funding into the Special Fund from both new construction for projects and renovations for projects, and continues the Special Fund's existence.

The two things it does that changes are one, it puts a cap on the amount of money going into the Special Fund. That seems like, on the face of it, kind of like a scary thing, but actually in practice, right now there already is a cap on the Special Fund. It's just on the back end.

The Special Fund can have a zillion $1.0 billion in it, but can only spend up to a certain amount. That is a legal limitation. So rather than just focus on the back end, what this bill does is put it right up front so it's very clear so that limitation doesn't change.

The other thing it does is change what the Special Fund Dollars, those bond finance dollars, can be used for.

So in this case, for example, the stuff that is in that gray area that is under such scrutiny and is jeopardizing a lot of the potential funding out there, not just here again, but in other places, using capital improvement dollars for things like positions, for programming for other stuff, is one of those legal gray areas that has to be fixed if we're going to maintain sort of the kind of support that we hope we have.

And at the same time, what the bill does, even though we're limiting the scope of what those dollars can be used for, is replace that funding with General funding out of the state. State dollars that don't have the same kind of federal issues, I guess we could say in the same way.

And the intent here is for all the positions at State foundation, which are some fantastic folks, I'm sure. As you guys know, there's actually some of you sitting in the room who do great stuff is to maintain those positions, just fund them from a different source.

And then secondly, for the programming for grants for stuff in schools and all around, the intent is to make sure that is state funded as well.

And at the end of the day, make sure that there's continuity through what is perhaps the most tumultuous and uncertain time we've faced as a state when it comes to the dollars and the economy and the positions and everything else that is now more uncertain than ever. Is the intent to move forward and ultimately preserve?

Absolutely, as much as we can across the board, beyond arts and everything else, but in this case, make sure that we have the mechanism in place so that we can do that, we can put dollars in the right places and preserve the federal support that we have without drawing the ire of folks who are going to point at us and say we are doing something illegal in the view of the IRS and other federal regulators.

So with all of that said, I hope that the intent at least is clear.

I think we're all on the same page here where I can say, at least for my part, the intent of this Committee and certainly the work we've been doing over the last few years, is to really expand the scope of what is happening in our community with respect to, to the arts, expand the kinds of programming we have, expand opportunities and education and all the rest of it.

That said, the question of how we get there is what this is really about and how we ensure that going forward we can fund these things in a way that doesn't jeopardize funding for programs across the state for people far beyond all of us sitting in this room on this one issue today.

So there's going to be a lot of time for discussion and testimony and questions. And I'll just note after this, we do have two other bills on the agenda which are arguably less, I think, the focus of everybody who showed up. So we'd like to ask everyone again to come up, testify.

So glad people are engaged this way. It's kind of uplifting in this moment when, you know, for politics, it's so easy to just disengage. And anyway, it's quite inspiring. But that said, we're gonna ask you to limit your testimony again so we can get to everybody.

And there's a bunch of folks online as well who'll be, I'm sure, joining us to testify on these measures. So if you can focus on things you want to say and do us a favor, make sure you have your written testimony submitted.

And to the extent you can try and focus on something that's relevant to you or hasn't been said, it's not terribly helpful to hear the same thing like 100 times and frankly, takes away time from other people who maybe have a different angle on things. So does that sound okay to everybody? Okay, Appreciate that.

So with that, let's get into House Bill 1378, relating to the State Foundation of Culture and the Arts. And testifying first is the office of the Governor. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair, Members of the Committee, Will Kane, senior advisor for Office of the Governor. I'll send in our written testimony. We have some concerns. We understand the things that you just explained, so we very much appreciate that I think the folks do here, so I'll leave it at that. And I'm here to answer questions.

And I apologize, I won't be able to stay very long because they're competing bills. I have to testify.

But thank you very much. Absolutely. Up next is the Department of Budget and Finance comments, Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Chair and Members of the Committee, Rick Mania. On behalf of DBEDT, I'd like to stand by our written testimony and comments on House Bill 1378 HD2. Thank you. Thank you.

Next is the Attorney General online? In the room. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Deputy Attorney General Alyssa Kyle. On behalf of the Department of the Attorney General, we provided written comments to you and we will be willing to. We basically our comments are about the implementation difficulties related to this measure. First, the bill creates a cap on the works of Special Art Fund.

However, it doesn't specify how the transfer of the how the caps of the transfer would be implemented into the fund. Second, as chair mentioned at the beginning of the hearing, the WASPs primarily consists of taxes exempt GO bonds.

So we want to be careful that when the comptroller segregates these excess funds in excess of the cap that the excess funds are not to be used for operational costs and are only to be used for CIP costs since any other consequences could put the tax exempt status of the bonds at risk.

Third, the bill also does not clarify how the comptroller or agencies who receive CIP funds will be able to calculate the total amount that they need to contribute to to the WASPs.

And it also does not ensure that the agencies are making sure or it doesn't ensure that there's going to be a proportionate share from each of those agencies. And finally, our last concern is that the bill does not explain how this cap will be monitored.

So it will be difficult for both the comptroller and the agencies to figure out what is the best implementation of the cap of the transfers. We are available for any questions that you may have. Thank you.

Thank you. Testifying next is the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts. Good afternoon.

I'm going to read from this so that I make it succinct. And Karen Ewald, State Foundation Culture and the Arts Executive Director we oppose this measure as it which amends the works of art Special Fund. I would like to propose some strategies to solve the concerns of the Legislature.

I know in the last hearing last year there was discussion on working with the state foundation closely during the interim to provide some solutions so that we could come forward together with a measure that we could get behind. I'm aware there is concern over the use of the Special Fund based on its source of revenue.

This concern can be addressed mindfully and with further collaboration. So I do propose that we change the practice, not the law at this time by doing the conduct an audit on the fund, establish a system to track the source of deposits into the fund by working with budget and finance.

Possibly establish a position to do this move and currently move the Special Funded positions and programs to General Fund. But keep the language in the Special Fund as contingency due to risk of economic downturn.

There is no need to change 1038.5 to make this move right as is finally lining the language out of 1038.5 puts funding for culture and arts at risk. This is funding used to serve the public. We feel that this is a short sighted decision that will negatively impact the FSCA and the community we serve as.

The loss of federal funding for state programs is imminent and we usually are among the first spots cut. As Executive Director of this agency my role is to ensure the longevity of the work we do for generations to come. And this amendment compromises that.

I would appreciate to have a in depth conversations on on something that we can come forward together in the next session.

Thank you. Thank you. Next is. Let me go through the folks who had signed up to testify who are in the room first. So I don't just spend a lot of time reading names who will never never be here. Signed up to testify. Next is SAG aftra.

Hi. The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and the Executive Director for here at the Hawaii Local and we stand in opposition.

Thank you. Up next is little Nakanishi. Good afternoon.

Thank you.

Good afternoon Chair. Good afternoon Committee. I'm really happy to be here. My name is Laurel Nakanishi. I work with Hawaii Open Arts or HOA Education program that is funded by the works of Arts Special Fund. I understand and I appreciate the explanation in the beginning and my main concern is to have sustainable funding for arts education specifically.

Specifically so that we can really go about building communication with the community and relationships that they can trust. Will be back again and again. We've all seen and I've been here before too the benefits of arts for children. I see it every day.

Our program has a lot of Ina based arts where students are going out into Ina based spaces using arts to work on social emotional learning and really encourage you to please oppose this bill and work on a long term solution for the problems we face. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next is the Hawaii Arts Alliance.

Good afternoon again. Thank you, Chairman and Committee Members.

I'm Gay Humphrey with the Hawaii Arts alliance, and we stand by our testimony in opposition to HB 1378 HD2 in its current form, particularly due to the impacts on the Works of Art Special Fund, which, as we know, has been a dedicated resource for arts and culture funding for decades.

I do want to express my gratitude for the clarification today, Chairman, and also for the valuable discussions that we had this morning with you and Senator Elefante. We did gain deeper understanding around the fiscal and legal complexities surrounding the fund.

We recognize the importance of responsible stewardship and urge careful consideration of the broader impact on Hawaii's arts and cultural landscape. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Up next is Donkey Mill Art Center.

Good afternoon. Aloha. My name is Ashley Raymond, Executive Director at the Donkey Mill Arts Center, a rural community art center in Kadua, Kona. I stand on my written testimony in opposition of HB 1378 HD2.

While the bill's original intent to establish a performing arts grant program is appreciated, its current form jeopardizes the Work of Art Special Fund, a critical funding source for SFCA. The State foundation is a vital resource for the arts and culture sector, supporting thousands of artists and organizations, including ours.

This year we celebrate our 30th anniversary as an organization, and that is 30 years of partnership with the state. State. It's through their Artists in the Schools program, we bring much needed arts education to hundreds of children in Honolulu and Kahakai elementary schools.

We're concerned that if the Works of Art Special Fund is restructured, these vital programs will be at risk. So we ask that you preserve the integrity of the fund and avoid relying solely on General Fund appropriations, especially during a time of federal funding remains so uncertain. Certain. Mahalanuru.

Thank you. Up next is Hawaii Arts Alliance Board Member Gil Mukahara Hanneman. Excuse me.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is Gil Mukahara Hanneman and I'm coming as a board Member of the Hawaii Arts Alliance. And I apologize I wasn't able to attend this morning's meetings. I just flew in from LA and actually three of us in this room, at least three of us, have just come back from Washington D.C.

and we really do have a pretty good understanding of how chaotic it is. It isn't over exaggerated in the news and we appreciate the things that you shared with us this morning and or this afternoon. And basically it seems like things fall into Three buckets. The General. There's just good General accounting practices related to bonds.

And I think the Attorney General's Office spoke to some issues of how if we clarify some things and it becomes clear what's going on, that, you know, there's some room for discussion. There's budgetary issues related to the Special Funds. I mean, Auditor's report says it's like $2.48 billion. And we're talking about Special Fund for the arts.

It's like 3 million relative to that huge pile. And we have. We're not part of the proliferation. We've been, as you noted, from the start. So we have a track record that I think is something that should be looked at and respected and figured out, a way in which we can address some of the budgetary issues.

And then the last is the performing arts. And we're in support of that. But I think the way and the mechanisms in which it's described raises some problematic issues relative to the other two categories as well. But that there has to be a way in which the state foundation could support that.

So we hope that there will be some opportunities to discuss and come up with some solutions moving forward and appreciate your support of the arts. Thank you.

Thank you. Next is Private Work Hawaii, Honolulu Printmakers Pro Arts Playhouse, Maui. Solomon Enos, Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Members of the Committee. My name is Solomon Robert Nui Enos. I am the artist in residence right across the street at the Capitol Modern. And it is an absolute treasure and joy to be able to work with all the children that come through the museum.

I'm deeply concerned about the wording in this bill because once this goes in, once we have to draw from General funding, the first time there's some kind of emergency, the arts will be the first thing cut. Art keeps people out of the emergency room in the first place.

And the impact of mental health, especially now when so many of our at risk communities or more vulnerable communities need a way to engage and need a way to tell their story. So this is. You're picking on one of the most passionate demographic that you can possibly do.

Also, I used to be a legislative aide here at the state capitol. And when you have a bill this unpopular and it keeps popping up over and over again, there's something else that's happening. And I really, I really, really want to restate my deep opposition to this bill. Art changes lives. It saves lives. Mahalo. Thank you.

Next is Nicholas.

First of all, thank you very much for that explanation. I think that was well needed. My name is Nicholas Claykini. I'm a musician, teacher, most importantly, father. And I think the biggest concern is how we value art, right?

On one end, we value art pretty significantly in Hawaii when we consider tourism and what it means to get people here. And I think for the most part, my grandfather probably single handedly brought in tons of money because of his show.

But when we consider the value of art as a community, as something local, right, I think it's kind of pushed to the side. And, you know, I want to offer you guys to come to one of our free events where you can actually see the community coming together, right? You know, art during a time of crisis, right?

It's something everyone relates to. Songs, singing. It boosts morale. So coming to these events, you know, you get to see children dance, Kupuna, admire art. And, you know, all these things come together. Local artisans being able to sell their things.

And so in one sense, you know, I want to really challenge this idea of the value of art. And I think you guys appreciate that. And, you know, on some levels, you know, some people don't. And so again, I appreciate your time and thank you for considering this. Thank you.

Up next is Alejandra Rohat Silva.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Thank you very much. Chair and rest of the Committee. My name is Tyler Ken. I am the Senior Curator of Modern Contemporary Art at the Honolulu Museum of Art, testifying here as an individual also in opposition to the bill.

Although I do greatly appreciate the sentiments you expressed and the clarifications that you made around the bill, I think when this came up last year, it was mentioned that there was no intent to disrupt the kind of steady flow of arts funding which has such a wide, not only cultural but economic benefit to this community.

And we hear that again. And I, you know, very presumably take it in good faith. However, when things do come out of a General Fund, as others have mentioned, it is far less secure.

And again, I just would like to reiterate what Karen Ewald mentioned about having perhaps a more robust conversation with Members of this community around the specific mechanism of arts funding. And perhaps some delay could allow for such a conversation to take place. Thank you.

Thank you. Next is Monica Johnson. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Aloha. I'm a second grade teacher with the DOE and I strongly oppose HB 1378. Many schools benefit and depend on the Art of Public Places program supported by the Works of Art Special Fund. We appreciate and look forward to the Hawaii State Art Museum's education program and Artists in the Schools opportunities.

Public school children just like private school children need the arts to help them learn, think creatively and express themselves. Please do not take away the arts, the creative arts, from our public. Children keep art Special Funds.

My students have written letters to you and created beautiful artwork to express how the arts are important and urge you to stop trying to take away the creative arts. One student said to you, think about people who love art and think about what you are doing. Many students said, stop. Keep your promise.

You're in office to help people. Arts help people. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Let me ask also, we typically do this folks can refrain from. If you could just maybe silently do your thing, that'd be helpful. Yeah. There you go. Okay. Up next is Jose Gonzalez.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is Jose Gonzalez. I'm an artist, printmaker, photographer. I also volunteer with the Holden Honolulu Printmakers who was not here to speak today, but I stand on my written testimony and.

Well, first of all, thank you Members of the Committee for allowing us to be here and speak and just inherent opposition to the bill and just want to add that I would like the state to. To keep its promise made to have a dedicated source of funding for the arts.

Because if those funds go to General funds, as it was stated before, there's no doubt in my mind that it will be the first thing that's cut. And there is this pervasive attitude in the world in General that art is only for the wealthy and for people with monetary funds.

But the state foundation and the organizations that it supports are the state's best tool to fight against that incorrect notion.

If you look at the list of the 10 happiest countries in the world with the best quality of life, most of those have dedicated funding sources for the arts, especially Finland, which has been on that list for seven years in a row. At number one place, they have a 1% for the arts law.

So let's just not pass this bill is what I'm here for. All right, thank you.

Thank you. Next is Stephen Makas.

Sorry if I pronounced that. It's okay. Thank you. It's good to see you again. Wish it was under better pretenses. Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Stephen Makas and I oppose this bill for the aforementioned. For the aforementioned reasons from my peers. Today I'm in a shirt showcasing the people who are frequent in the Hawaii arts scene.

And I felt it is important for you folks to see the people that will be affected by the passing of HB 1378 to see the people who couldn't make it today and Understand that this is only a fraction of a fraction of the people who enjoy and revel in the Hawaii art scene.

The wording in this bill as it stands has to be. Has to be rewritten in a way that stops pissing off the local artists. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next, Michael Zemel. Rihanna. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon to you. Hi, my name is Rihanna Elena Lewis. I'm an artist and I also work in homeless services here. As a child from a broken home, music and writing were the only things that I had to help me process and cope.

And expressing myself in music was a way for me to get my emotions out in a healthy way. And it's still that way for me. Mental health is an issue that is not just on these islands, but it's on the world as a whole.

And studies have shown that persons who participate in art therapy decrease feelings of anxiety and depression. I truly believe that art is mental health and art is prevention for mental illness. I also want to just express that like I mentioned, I do work in homeless services here.

There's around 6,000 persons that are homeless from the per the last homeless count. And about one third of those people are experiencing mental illness. And I would say probably even more especially coming from working in the field. I think prevention of homelessness looks like mental health.

And I think focusing on art and music and understanding that that is something that really helps persons mentally should be considered and not just something that is just looking at as a pastime. And I just also want to express that my parents really struggled to help support me as an artist.

They had no idea how to help me when I was a child and I just kind of had to figure it out on my own. And these programs help parents. They're holding parents hands and bringing kids in and being like, here, explore this creative side or help to curate it.

And I just think that it's just something that should be viewed more as like part of our health system and not just something extra. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next is Kaela Tiho. Emily McElroy. Lloyd. Harold Kumala ausing Jr.

I haven't heard online.

Yeah. Please proceed.

Sorry.

Hello. Can everyone here.

Yeah, go ahead. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Yeah. Why don't we take Emily first and then Lloyd? Apologies.

That's okay. Yeah. My name is Emily McElroy. I'm an art educator and artist in Hawaii and have been at UH and working for the music, both museums and my own practice for almost 17 years. Admittedly, I don't know a whole lot about the mechanics of how everything works.

But I would just briefly like to say that I share the concern of all of my peers who have testified in opposition to the bill and the way it's currently worded, and I just support further conversation to ensure a dedicated source of funds for the arts. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Lloyd, are you still there?

Okay, Aloha, everybody. Aloha. Aloha to the Committee. My name is Lloyd Kumula Al Singh and I give my testimony in opposition of this, of this measure, House Bill 1378, that ultimately will threaten the long term stability of arts and culture funding through the dismantling of the works of arts Special Fund.

The works of our Special Fund in Hawaii is the only dedicated, reliable funding source for our arts community. Even during times of economic hardship.

This measure will replace this funding with federal and general funds which are not always guaranteed and will compete with other state priorities in times when bigger important issues, other issues just as important, like housing, education, health care is affected.

Although this Bill says it will allocate $4 million to support funding for the next two fiscal years in 26 and 27, it does not guarantee further support beyond that.

The short term funding gain will not strengthen Hawaii's art community, but in the long run weaken it by removing the safeguards that were in place with the Works of Art Special Fund. This Bill has potential to cause great harm to the art community and cut many initiatives.

As a beneficiary of the State Foundation Cultural Arts and Folk Traditional Arts grant, I have seen how art is timeless. It has the ability to heal, capture feelings, beliefs of how we as the people of Hawaii and our society has come in good and bad times.

As a culture baron, weaving practitioner, I ask you all to please not Support House Bill 1378. Art is a creative form of sovereignty and healing to everyone who calls Hawaii its home. Malo for your time and consideration to allow me to share my manao and views to this Committee today. Aloha.

Thank you very much. These next testifiers are all going to be on Zoom. So if you're there, please turn your video on and get ready. But up next is Michael Wilson. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Yeah, so I stand by my written testimony.

I think a lot of people have said this and I really have a question for you, Chairman Lee, is that it seems to be the number one problem everyone is having is that by moving to the General funds you have the dedicated part of the funds seems to be at risk where they can just sort of disappear at the whim of, say, a finance person who's in charge of money.

And I was wondering, as the Chairman of the arts, what systems do you see that could be enacted that would make those funds protected and dedicated for the future generations? I'll give the rest of my time to you. So to respond.

So we'll get into, after everyone has an opportunity to testify, we'll get into Q and A at that point.

Okay, that's my concern.

Yeah. Thank you. Next is Emily States.

Not available on Zoom Chair.

Sherman Warner.

Also not available on Zoom.

Samuel Shriver.

Also not available online.

Oh yeah, please come forward. Hello, how are you?

Good to see you again. My name is Sam Scriver. I am a working artist on Kauai and I flew here specifically to be here today and in opposition of the Bill, obviously and to also voice all of my peers and creative associates on Kauai that they all oppose this as well.

Everything has been said that I would say. Just the Bill untethers and can gravely disrupt a very fragile ecosystem that really should not be disrupted. So, please do not move forward with this. Thank you.

Thank you. Next is back on Zoom. Paul James Brown.

Good afternoon Vice Chair, Members of the Senate Committee on Transportation, Arts and Culture. My name is Paul James Brown. I'm the former co-chair of the Maui Democrats Education Committee and a pro bono visual arts consultant for the state foundation on the culture and the arts. I'm testifying as an individual in opposition to HB 1378-HD2.

While I fully support efforts to provide funds for the performing arts, I do not believe it should be at the expense of the current beneficiaries of the works of art special fund.

This Bill would harm the State Museum, the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, the artists, staff and workers who support the purpose of the special fund, not to mention the people of Hawaii.

As you mentioned, the late Masaoro Pandey Yukauchi was the visionary who was responsible for the creation of the first in the nation special und for the creation, selection, purchase and maintenance of works of art owned by the state.

Since then, every state, many cities and the Federal Government followed Hawaii's first in the nation Special Fund for the Visual Arts. Also, this Bill places a cap on the proceeds for the from the fund. This will be harmful as well.

If the Legislature wants to create additional recipients of funds and expand the cope of the scope of Pundi's vision, then the best way to do that would be to create a new fund for the performing arts or expand the percentage in the current fund to create a win, win, win.

I hope you agree this Bill as written is harmful to the arts in our state and would be an insult to the memory of Pundi Yokauchi. Please join me in opposing this Bill moving any further. Mahalo Nui Law.

Thank you. Up next, still online is Margaret Sutrov.

Not available on Zoom Chair.

Thank you. Okay, that's everyone who had signed up to testify in person. I'm just gonna. Quick show of hands, who else who's showed up here today wishes to testify who has not yet. Okay, why don't we start on this side of the room. If you could just come forward one at a time and state your name and.

Good afternoon. Hi, how are you? My name is Dean Harada. I'm here testifying as individual. I just want to say to those who are going to be making a decision on this, I ask that before you make a decision to go across the street to Capital Modern and see the scholastic exhibition that's there now.

I think it speaks to the power of what art has to offer to our Keiki and it allows, it's allowing them this platform right now to envision a future for Hawaii that involves them and their voices.

And I think in doing that it also creates a platform for education which perhaps someday will allow them to govern this nation with a sovereign mind instead of purely a indentured one.

I want to kind of just really kind of quickly throw out a thought exercise which is to imagine if we handed over other non essential tasks like let's say the arts to the Federal Government, because ultimately that is fundamentally, if we go and put this money in the General Fund, that is what is a potential to happen, that the Federal Government will be responsible for these things.

And I want to ask if we hand over the non essential task of naming our streets, how would it be nameless and how would it feel to live in a place where the streets were named Maple and Oak and we drove on Kennedy and Reagan highway instead of Likiliki and Pali, where Al Moana was not at the corner of Kapiolani and Keamoku, but it was, you know, Ocean Way at the corner of first and Main.

And I want to consider, I want to ask everybody to consider, would this be the same place and how would that change us as people? I think it would be an erasure and I think it would be a shame on all of us who allowed that to happen. This is our Kuleana for future generations.

This is our legacy and this is why I'm speaking here. So mahalo for your time.

Do you support or oppose? It seems like you're supporting.

I. No, actually I do not. It's just comments and I feel like it's just important to consider.

We appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next. Good afternoon.

Michael Zimmel. Thank you for letting me talk and good to see you again. So again, I'd like to thank you because this year a legend passed right In Sator Abed. I got to see him as art and medium, as a person. It changed me. That's an investment we made years ago. That's still paying off today.

We have to keep making that investment. If this Bill does not guarantee funding going forward, it's a bad Bill. Strongly bucks.

Who's. I saw a few people left. Oh, yeah. Please come forward.

Aloha. Eric Johnson with Honolulu Theatre for Youth. I submitted some written testimony, and I wasn't going to come down here because it's my birthday. But then I decided. I thank you. I decided I wanted to, and I'm so glad I did because I really, really appreciate your comments and at the opening and the chance for discussion.

And I believe you. I believe you want to support the art, and this Committee wants to do that. I do stand in opposition of the Bill, and I want to say something new, which is that I think it's hard for us.

We have a groundswell of people, our whole board of directors, lots and lots of people will support you in supporting the arts. We can bring that to the table.

It's really discouraging, however, to come and be like, oh, this is going to be a Bill about expanding the arts, and then come back and say, oh, now I'm opposing it, because it has, you know, these other things that have been added that we feel like have been discussed before.

And so I think that, I guess my request, and I realize I am quite naive about the political process, but just the clarity that you spoke at the beginning of this session and being able to communicate clearly that, okay, we need to solve some accounting issues, this is what this is going to be about, or engaging the community in directly in the issues instead of, like, changing the Bill, moving, adding some things that were there but weren't there.

It's really disconcerting. And it's hard to know how to support you supporting us when it changes like that. So, I just want to throw that out as a little bit of new thought to consider going forward.

Thank you. Thank you. Who's. Who's up next? Please come forward.

Hi. Hello again, everybody. My name is Kayla. I'm from Oahu, and I am very grateful to be heard right now in the face of everything we're facing today.

I was here about a year ago to the day to protest this Bill in its prior form and to testify to the value of art in both physicality and emotional value. I spoke of the value of our voices here in Hawaii and the. And how we deserve to be heard beyond the islands.

The fact that artistic expression is intrinsic to our human nature and the vitality of the artistic conversations born before the existence of writing that countless people, including the folks at the SFCA, have dedicated their lives to nurturing.

Though the content of this Bill remains the same and what I said last year loses no importance, the conversation has evolved along with the issues we're facing now with the unprecedented assaults on our rights. We need fit leaders who reinforce our community and show up for us.

Our community deserves leaders whose policies do not further fracture our communities and suppress our voices. Art has been a means to express radical dissent to oppression. It captures the significance of pivotal moments both factually and emotionally. I am a full time student, worker and single parent. The last thing I have is time.

But I make it for what is important to me and what is important to me in my community. All of us here have lives, family, and many, many obligations outside of this. But we all showed up because it's important to us. I honestly do not see the person who presented this Bill. And it is his job.

You introduce this Bill and again, for the second year in a row, you are not here to listen to us. We deserve to be heard. We deserve to have our voices considered and we deserve. The arts deserve this funding. Thank you. I very strongly oppose.

Thank you. Okay.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Aloha. My name is Sima Sueko Lowe. It's great to be here. Chair Lee and members of the committee, thank you so much for this opportunity. So, I am a temporary 89 day hire at State foundation on Culture and the Arts. I serve as the administrative services assistant and my time will sunset May 2nd.

But, I'm also a theater artist, a performing artist. I've submitted written testimony in opposition and I wasn't planning on speaking. But, like my colleague Eric Johnson, I couldn't help but want to respond to the illumination you provided at the start of this meeting.

Working at, in the capacity that I've had as a ASA at SFCA, I've had an opportunity to really dive deep into the accounting. I've helped to process bills, make sure folks are paid here, and make sure we do everything above board. You know, you bring up this bond issue and actually you.

I've heard it before in some of these private meetings, I've had the privy to be in. And that has prompted me to study bonds and to learn what does that mean for our bond rating.

I can't help but think it's a little bit of a false flag because for 36 years, the works of Art Special Fund has existed as it has and as of November 2024, the State of Hawaii's bond rating is a double A. It is high. It's good.

And that's with the Works of Art Special Fund existing as it is. So I can't understand how it existing as it has existed is a new threat when it's been 36 years of this. So that's a concern I have that confuses me.

Next, you mentioned that this isn't really lowering the cap, but it is because the cap is now $2 million lower than what we currently have. And, I want to believe that you want to support the arts.

But again, being in some of these private meetings, I've heard threats, threats from representatives saying they will zero out SFCA's budget and that it's so hard to believe that you want to help the arts. Thank you for this opportunity. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Who else in the room? Oh, yeah.

Hello, Mr. Chairman. My name is Levi Randon. I'm a 17 year old from Moanalua High School. I am in the music Department there. I play in the Symphonic Wind Ensemble. And as you may know, a few years ago we got a government grant to build our performing arts center. And it is very much encouraged a great community there.

But even with all of these grants, with all of the funding, we still have to do the Music Boosters Association, we have to pay money to be able to support our foundations in the music community. And I just, I want to press in how much music is a community factor in, you know, bringing joy to people.

We just had our central district parade of fans. And every year, schools from across the state come in to share their music. And it's just, it would be made a lot harder with the cap to be put in there. And we wouldn't, you know, have as much funding in there.

And I just want to say I oppose this Bill.

Thank you. Anyone else in the room? How many others still haven't gone? One, two three. Okay. We're here. Good afternoon.

Okay, so. Hi, I'm Vayoshida. I also go to Moanalu High School with Levi. I'm a senior there. And naturally college comes up a lot in our discussions with, like, my peers and stuff.

And I know a lot of people who are choosing to give up their dreams of being an artist or pursuing art in higher education or becoming an artist professionally because they're scared for the loss of support and the loss of funding, and they're scared that their elected officials won't, like, invest in their passions and what they want to do.

And I don't want my peers to have to choose between thinking they have financial security and what they really want to do with their lives because of fear for funding being taken away. That's it. Thanks.

Thank you.

Then on this side of the room. Members of the Committee, Jonathan Johnson, former Executive Director of the State Foundation and very familiar with 103-8.5. And I'll offer something different, which is a couple of ideas of how to address your concerns, the ones you explained earlier.

So what happens is the works of art special Fund receives a variety of funds. So you've got tax exempt bonds, which are the ones that are of the biggest concern. You've got taxable bonds, which is what the state is mostly using now. And you've got other sources of revenue that go into that Fund.

What used to occur was there was a position that would sort that and monitor that so you would know how much of the taxable bonds are there, how much of the tax exempt bonds are there. So, if we could reinstitute that. Now, BNF doesn't have an accounting system right now that can accomplish that. So it's all paper.

So the A15s come in. Someone has to actually look at those and then decide. So if you can figure out that, so reinstitute a position or just sort where the money goes, then you can make sure that, oh, the taxable or the tax exempt bonds are only used for capital investments. Right.

And then you can use other parts of it that way. It's not as draconian as lining out all of this, but it gives you an option of, okay, how do you track that money and make sure you're doing it correctly? Because I think that's what we always strive to do. That's, that's my. The basis of my ideas.

There's other ways to do it besides globally lining things out. And then, for example, the staff services. It's not illegal to use those staff service, the fund bond fund for staff services. It's just not best practice. Obviously, you don't want to pay interest on that person's employment for 40 years. Right. So, yeah, move it to general fund.

But once you line it out, out of the law, there's nowhere to go back. When we had the recession or through Covid, we always had the works of art special Fund to ride through this storm. And without that, if you take away the federal funding, the special funding, and the general funding, then we're done. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. There's someone else on the. Yeah.

Aloha chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members, Makanani Salah the only thing though I have to offer is in my former life, I was the chair of the city side that does this kind of work, Chair Commission on Culture and the Arts. And we do it the way that you're proposing.

And just to offer some perspective, it is very, very difficult for us to get any kind of funding for operations, previously. Things get cut. Arts is the first to get cut. And so, for example, you keep the works of arts special Fund as it is.

You get your 1% and you buy all of these art pieces, you Commission these huge statues. But the amount of funding that you're getting for maintenance or for programming stays the same or actually gets cut. And so it's like we're buying all of these books for the library that we can have no place to keep them.

We have no fumigation. And so maybe the issue really is coming back and looking at how the law is written and the ways that we can work with legal, budget and finance in order to make it work. Because I think the way that the state is doing it actually makes a lot more sense.

And as you foremost any former City Council Members know, it is really difficult for us to Fund the arts on the city side because of this. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else in the room wishing to testify? Is there anyone else outside? There's a lot who hasn't testified. Okay. If not, I'll note it is 4:20. We don't have a ton of time. There are two other bills on our agenda.

I'm sure the folks who had showed up here for those would love to get to. So why don't we get into some quick Q and A before we move off of this Bill and then hopefully next 10 minutes or so move on to the last two.

So with that, if there's no one else here to testify in the measure. Are there questions?

Senator, I have questions for Director Ewald. Hi, Director. Thank you for your testimony and your written testimony as well. So, I do like the ideas that you have shared. I think one thing that wasn't talked about was sort of a delayed implementation. Is that something that SFCA would be open to?

Definitely, as long as we maintain that communication on problem solving moving forward during the interim, starting now through the interim, so that we can come together to the table in the next session with a solution. I would very much prefer that I'm available too.

We're also looking at alternate sources of funding in the future and we want to do that as well. But a delayed implementation

And a follow up question. I know, the former Director Johnson was here and he talked about how he was very familiar with the funding. Obviously, you're very familiar with it. Have there been any inquiries into the status or concerns with the use of the bond funding and how those funds are used for positions?

There have not. On the national level, and we have. For the 10 years I've been with the State Foundation, we have gone through audits, we've gone through reviews with the Attorney General's Office, comptroller's Office, with the Office of Auditor to ensure that line by line, we are using the Fund appropriately. And we have been. We've checked out.

We welcome another audit. We welcome those kinds of.

Do you remember when the last audit was?

The last review was in 20. Very recently. Okay. With the comptroller's office and the Attorney General. I believe it was, I believe, pre-pandemic, but 2019. I'll let you know. That'll be great. Yeah, can definitely do that. I was with. I was deputy at the time and John was the Executive Director.

Thank you, Director. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Further questions. Let me go back to. Sorry, thanks for your patience, everybody.

Is the Attorney General still here? Yeah. First of all, thanks again for sticking around through all that testimony here. There's a lot of moving parts that we've been talking about. You'd raised earlier a couple of questions about the mechanics of both the Bill and as it moves money around and all of that stuff.

With respect to, I think some of the questions that or suggestions that have been raised both by the Executive Director and some of the others. Is there anything there that jumps out at you that would raise any sort of legal concerns if there is some sort of IRS intervention in the near future?

So we haven't had an opportunity to review the testimony or the suggested comments by SFCA or if DAGs has provided those comments separately. And we're happy to work with those. Entities. To see if those are viable or not.

And then. Okay, if we can follow up afterward. I realize time is tight. That'd be something that we can check in on. Sure. Thank you. There's no further questions for the moment. Back to SFCA. Ms. Ewald, thank you so much for your work and testimony.

One of the gentlemen online who was testifying had asked what were the other options that might be considered for revenue generation or stability in the future? Just in General, do you have other thoughts on sources of revenue beyond federal funds and General state funds?

Yeah, I mean, considering that there is a real threat to the General funds, you know, there's going to be a need for General funds to be allocated to things like school lunches, health and human services.

And with the threat of the special Fund being amended, we have been looking into different sources of revenue and also alternate sources of funding, dedicated funding sources. The one that we're really researching closely is the establishment of a cultural trust, which we've been talking with our colleagues on the continent about. We're doing research on other funding sources.

It's really reaching out to the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies and getting those folks to talk to us about all the different revenue sources. Some states have lotto tax and gambling and things like that that we don't have. But. But we're actively looking into it. It's just going to take some time, you know.

And there are other states that do also have CIP bond funds for their. For works, for our special Fund as well, which we've been talking to. So. And there has not been a threat on their end, is there?

At least. So right now, the State Museum, is that the only property that sort of falls in your, like, physical property that falls in your.

Yeah. The. The second floor. Yeah. That is the only property. And running that property with revenue generating rentals is. Can be a challenge. We do it, but you know, we, we do that and, and there's a demand. But the revenue, you know, for.

For finding a source of revenue for this, for what we do, we would have to. Our five year average income is about $5 million and our five year expense is 5 million. So it would need to be a 5 million per year revenue. So.

And for the downstairs, I forget the name of the new shop that just opened up. Yeah, yeah. Is that something that is under your.

That is with the Friends of the Hawaii State Art Museum.

And where does the revenue for that go?

To them. They have a concession. Concession, Concession.

But It's a separate C3, you're saying?

Yes.

And the trust you're envisioning, where would that live?

I don't know. We're still looking into that. There are different ways to establish that kind of cultural trust and some cultural trusts, I've been told get scooped by legislation in some states and others are robust. But that's something that we're looking into and I'd like to have further conversation with all of you on.

But that would be a conversation as well with the community to ensure that stakeholders are all in. So.

Okay, thank you very much.

What's interesting, I'm reading Mike Kakani's From Hawaii Community foundation testimony and he talks about the excess for the arts program for the Keiki throughout the state and he talks about the change framework. Are you familiar with that? The change Framework.

It's one of the programs that the community foundation has and he is saying that he'd like to continue. We should continue the program with arts for who are Kiki and doesn't want to see a reduced. They're opposing the community this Bill anyway.

But he is saying that HCVCF is committed to increasing access to arts and culture as one of the six essential sectors of the change framework. And apparently, I guess this measure before us today is ringing a bell to everyone throughout the community as well. And it has reached the foundation and so hopefully that will continue the relationship.

If you have contact Micah, let's make sure I'll remind him you talked about the change framework. Let's continue and see if we can include a contribution to, you know, to the arts and to your.

To our agency that we need to preserve that they are committed and it seems like probably we are not part of the change framework. And he's looking into it.

So I appreciate you saying that Center. I haven't Read the testimony. But I'll just. Yeah, I'll make sure.

Let us know. Thank you. Okay. That's a contribution from the foundation and the private sector, and we need more. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Further questions?

Maybe if. Sorry, we don't have time to engage in a full discussion, but maybe if you call her up.

Good. Get some more foundation help. Thank you. Thank you so much for all you do.

Okay, if there's no further questions from the Committee, thank you, everyone, for your patience. We're going to move on—especially those folks who are here for the other two bills that are yet to come up. So, let's move on to House Bill 458, relating to Brother Joseph Dutton Day.

Testifying first on HB 458 is the Department of Accounting and General Services.

Chair, Vice Chair, on behalf of Comptroller Keith Regan, Department of Accounting and General Services, I am Dr. Adam Jansen, and it is my pleasure to serve as your state archivist.

As the keepers of public memory, we feel very strongly that this is an excellent opportunity to really bring back a piece of history that is not frequently discussed—or at least in the context that it could be. We all know Father Damien and honor him for his 16 years of service.

Joseph Dutton served the residents of Kalaupapa for 44 years, risking his life and his health to bring humanity back to these individuals that were banished and literally written out of history. So, by recognizing Joseph Dutton for this day, not only do we honor him.

But we also bring back the story of all of those individuals that were literally written out of history. And we are very blessed to have the brother Dutton files in the archives.

And should this Bill go forward, as we do hope, we look forward to digitizing them and making them accessible to education everywhere, so that we can continue to honor him and hold Brother Dutton up as a role model of what it means to be part of society.

So, thank you for this opportunity to testify, and we're always happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. I also have testimony from Patrick Bullen.

Good afternoon, members of the Committee. Basically, we'll just stand on the written testimony. The merits of the proposal are well expressed in Section One of the Bill, and the written testimony you've received, including DAGS or the archives.

Our only suggestion would be that you make the effective date upon approval, with the hopes that the House would agree and we could avoid the perils of the conference Committee process. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Brenda Duarte.

Submitting my written testimony. I just stand on that written testimony. I just—I think you have—you have testimony of three of the current residents in Kalaupapa, and I have other family members that lived in Kalaupapa. And I just kind of stand here as a descendant, as a voice for those who are not here. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

We also have testimony from four individuals, all in support. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure this afternoon? Let's see—are there any questions? If not, thank you. Let's move on to the next measure on the agenda: House Bill 957, relating to Lao Lao Day.

Testifying first on 957 is the Office of Hawaiian affairs support. So have testimony. Let's see. Oh, sorry. Signed up to testify. Is Tiny Shah online? I may be butchering the name. I apologize.

Not available online. Zoom.

Okay. I was the only person actually signed up to testify. But we have a good amount of testimony, written testimony that's been submitted. Is there anyone else in the room with us wishing to testify on this measure? All right, seeing none, since there's no one to ask questions of.

That was the last measure on our agenda of the four. So let's see. It's 4:35, a little tight on time. Okay, so why don't we do this?

We'll go straight into decision making on these measures and we do have a follow up agenda of measures that were previously heard in this Commttee that we'll have to vote on as well. So let me go through. We'll take the 3:15 p.m. agenda first and we'll come back afterward for the next one.

So beginning with HB 925 relating to the arts, this is the Performing Arts Special Fund. We'd like to defer this for decision making until Tuesday the 18th. That's this coming Tuesday at 3:02 p.m. here in this room, Conference Room 224.

That'll give us some time to dive into some of the stuff that came up, I think in discussion here today. Secondly, on House Bill 1378 relating to the State Foundation on Culture and Arts, this was the bill I think we spent the most time on. I'd like to move this forward, making some amendments.

And first of all, let me say thank you to everybody who took the time out to come down for this today.

I meant this when I said it like it's so refreshing to see, I think people first of all getting involved and the passion and everything else because, you know, it's been a rough start to the year, I think for most folks in federal and state government and who are, who are relying on programs all around from coast to coast, not just here in Hawaii, but all over the place.

That said, do appreciate, I think, the testimony and especially some of the conversations around potential fixes for some of the issues that were raised and ultimately potential fixes for the funding mechanisms and all that sort of thing that we touched on today.

While I think there's time and opportunity to dive into that which we will be doing within the Legislature, we're on a tight timeline and in order to keep things going, we need to move bills along in fairly rapid pace in order to keep vehicles alive that we can then stick whatever solutions into at the end of the day that need to be done.

So that said, I'll say for my part, everything I said at the beginning of this hearing about wanting to preserve and maintain funding for the arts as well as programming and positions and everybody else, you know, out in our communities and organizations that rely on that is critical.

And frankly, like in the face of everything we've been seeing elsewhere that is now trickling down to Hawaii, you know, I think we have to take these things seriously.

So I want to suggest some amendments here to this as we go forward that will touch on, I think, some of the possible long term revenue generation sources and things that we talked about and heard from the Executive Director about.

So first we'd like to move forward making amendments to Section 6 to add planning, design and construction of works of art and related appurtenances that's in the scope of what the works of art specialist fund can be used for.

So not only acquiring art, but also when we're commissioning, you know, something that's a statue or who knows what it might be, but that is a physical thing that is clearly within the clear scope of authorization for what kinds of bond financing are authorized to fund.

Secondly, you want to provide for the SFCA to hold and own property, providing that revenue generated from such properties shall be used to support the mission of the SFCA, to support the maintenance, security, operations and renovation of facilities controlled by the SFCA.

And that's, I think, in line with what we've been looking at the last couple of years just for this exact kind of situation where we can generate alternative sources of revenue that can help supplement direct state or other appropriations and over the long term give the complete control and flexibility to individual agencies or in this case, arts agencies, to be able to have their own budget and resources that they have control over.

So, and so there's sort of clear pathway for the future to be able to expand on that, which over time, finally we'll make some technical amendments to the bill that are non substantive. The bill does have defective data on it as it goes forward.

But I say all this because I think there is opportunity to generate alternative sources of revenue and get more certainty in that space regardless of where all the public side funding comes from.

That said, for my part, and I'll speak just for me here, you know, in the last six weeks since our new Administration has taken office, we've seen an unprecedented wholesale gutting of federal capacity, federal positions, federal funding, as you know, funding for arts at the federal level and as it trickles down to states.

That is now in jeopardy. That's happened in six weeks. I don't think, frankly, we can wait a year to come back and be here next year having not tried to insulate ourselves and the programs and positions and everything else that our communities rely upon and just hope that things are going to work out.

I wish it wasn't this way in this moment, but I think we have to be prudent and we have to be cautious.

And as I said before, the intent here is to ensure continuity and funding regardless of all of the uncertainty out there and make sure that especially for the employees in the agency, programs, grants and everything else and everybody in our communities there is funding available.

So that means keeping the bill alive, keeping the discussion going and have conversations, I think, with some of the ideas that have been raised as we try and sort through this and talk with our attorneys general as well as SFCA and Budget and Finance and the other various departments.

So that being the case, wanted to give an opportunity for anybody else to say anything and share comments?

Sure. Are we going to make any amendments to stop the dedicated funding source that's recognized? Because right now they have a dedicated funding source. So are we making any changes to that in this measure?

We're only adding in terms of amendments. We're adding in a few amendments. We're not as everything's blanked out in the measure for what caps and what levels those might be as well as that sort of thing. That is all to be determined.

But who will determine that we're going. I know this measure goes to WHAM. Yes. But if we don't make a recommendation on our part then, and if Wham doesn't recognize that to go into the budget, they may just slash the funding and it'll be too late. So I appreciate that.

I don't believe that's going to be the case. Okay. Then at the end of the day. Because we are. So when this goes to conference. Okay, so can I make a suggestion?

Okay. Because we're not touching the. We're not making an amendment. Can you add that our concerns about deleting the dedicated funds into the Committee report? Oh, yeah, no.

In the community report, we're gonna. We're gonna just note, I think, the extreme sort of unprecedented situation we're in and the anxiety that's giving everybody over cuts to services, but at least coming from. And kind of spell out, at least.

Coming from the Committee that we are concerned and that when it goes to WHAM, at least they can recognize that we should continue the discussions with them. Okay. And that. And I'm happy that some. Most of us are on the Ways and Means Committee. But just to add that, I'd like to see that in the Committee report.

Thank you.

Senator Elefante.

Chair, would you be open to putting in a delayed implementation date?

So there's a defective date of 3,000 here. So when the time comes, if this moves through the end of the process, then we can figure out, working with some of the stakeholders, what that should look like.

Okay.

But we can note in the Committee report in terms of timelines, that something should be considered.

Okay with that. If I just may offer a few comments. So I have serious concerns with what's being proposed. I know that the bill has changed and has been amended, and what we got from the House has changed drastically from what it was first introduced. So my primary concerns specifically has to do with.

I'd still like to have a conversation with the Department of Tax, as I don't see their written testimony or their engagement in this, as well as further conversations with Director Ewald and Budget and Finance and Attorney General.

There's still a lot of sort of unknowns for me, but to continue the conversation, I'll be voting in support, however, with serious reservations. And as we continue those conversations with that delayed implementation date, hopefully I can get some answers in terms of the impact that this may have.

If it is true that it is the bond financing that is the concern with the utilization of the funds. So I just like to note that for the record. Thank you.

Anybody else? Yeah, I'm sorry. Go ahead.

Thank you. Just in regards to the overwhelming opposition here, and, you know, I do appreciate the intent of this bill. However, funding does seem to be the primary source of concern not only with some of our colleagues here, but also with people who have testified.

I do look forward in following the process As I do hope to implement these changes and these concerns as of right now, I will be voting down. However, I will be following the bill.

If we're able to make these implementations where stakeholders are satisfied and we are able to implement these, these options, I will vote up on the final floor. But I think for right now, I'm just going to be voting down, but I will be following through and I hope to support it as we move along. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair. And I appreciate all the testimony. I also have some concerns about a lot of this. I think we all need better clarity about what exactly the overall intent of this is going to be, not only for ourselves, but for the entire community. I think that's going to be really important as this bill.

If this Bill does move forward, I think we all need to be on the same page in how we first of all take care of each other and move on with what's happening at the federal level as well.

So that's just some, a bunch of the concerns that I can kind of bring down into one that we can all just figure out exactly the. I mean, thank you for clarifying a lot of these things. It's just very, there's a lot of moving pieces to this. So I just want to state that. So thanks, Chair.

I appreciate it.

Just. And just in closing, I'm sorry, Chair, but just to add that, you know, the governor's office is opposing this measure as well. So with that said, even if we're working hard at it, we know that it's going to reach his desk and he may not sign it.

So let's make sure that we know what we're doing at the final outcome. But you know, just to remember, it goes to him and he can't get away with it because he sends communication in opposition in writing. So just to remind us, thank you.

Okay. Thank you and thanks again to everybody for going through the process and sticking around through the whole thing and sticking around in the days and weeks to come.

So with that, on HB 1378, the lady state Foundation Collection of the Arts, the recommendation is to pass with amendments, I think, acknowledging the discussion that's been had here today as well as what led to the Committee report. So everyone having had an opportunity to say a few words, Vice Chair, take the vote, please.

Thank you. For the Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts, Chair's recommendation on HB 1378, House Draft 2 to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] Measure is adopted.

Moving on to House Bill 458 relating to "Brother Joseph Dutton Day". Recommendations to pass with amendments defecting the date to April 27th 2843. You're smiling, so I think you recognize that date. Any discussion with amendments?

Okay. Chair's recommendation on HB 458. House draft two to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. And finally moving on to House Bill 957 relating to Lao Day. Recommendation is to pass with amendments defecting the date to November 16, 2836. The discussion see none. Vice Chair with amendments.

Here's recommendation on HB 957. House drift 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measures adopted. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. So just for everyone who's been sticking around, that is the end of our 3:15 p.m. agenda. We do have one more deferred agenda that we're about to go into that we've previously on measures previously heard in this Committee. So we'll go straight into that and. Oh Okay. Thanks.

Okay. I need. I need a hearing notice. Okay.

Sorry. We'll adjourn the 3:15 p.m. agenda and we'll open up just a second for our 3:02 p.m. agenda. All right. Good afternoon. We're reconvening the Committee on Transportation and Culture in the arts on our 3:02 p.m. agenda, which was measures deferred that were previously heard in Committee.

We're in State Capital Conference Room 224, and we have before us six measures beginning with House Bill 1259 relating to transportation. Like to recommend moving this forward with some amendments. This specified that an engineering study is not required to be considered when reducing the maximum speed limit on highways within a range of 10 miles per hour.

I'd like to amend the bill, adding in a recommendation that highways that pass through communities with residential or commercial areas or schools that are immediately on the highway.

The Department of Transportation should be using the National Association of City Transportation Officials standards, which offers more flexibility and prioritizes safety for people living in the air with pedestrian, bike and other transit elements, as opposed to the American Association of State highway and Transportation Official standards, which is more focused on actual highway design for moving people quickly from A to B, but tends to be a little less ideal for places where you have needs for a lot more pedestrian safety because there's a lot more people living immediately in the area.

The state does have the flexibility to decide which set of standards it uses in different areas. So want to recommend to the Department they go that direction. So any. And I'll note this has a existing defective date in it. So any discussion on.

On that Chair's recommendation of the Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts. HB 1259 House Draft 1 passed with amendments. [Roll Call] Measure's adopted. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. We went House Bill 1260 relating transportation. This is the Summer streets pilot program bill. We'd like to move this forward making some amendments to address the Department of Health and other recommendations for including communities on Oahu. We'd like to make an amendment that adds four counties over 250,000 for any proposals required by this act.

County shall collaborate jointly with the State Highway Safety and Modernization Council to develop proposals to be submitted to DOT.

And then secondly, amend the reporting agency to include DOH doing the report on how the pilots were received after being normalized over a period of time in each case, and enable partnerships with appropriate agencies or organizations to help do the evaluations, collect data, et cetera, as may be necessary.

And then finally amend Section 4 to be an effective date of 2050.

Chair's recommendation on HB 1260 House Draft 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? I'm up. You're up. Okay. Yeah. All right. Measures adopted. Mr. Chair. Thank you. Sorry I changed.

Moving House Bill 177 linked to Civil ID cards. This makes the issuance of a renewal of Civil ID cards free of charge. I would like to move this forward with amendments noting the concerns raised by the Attorney General about unfunded mandates in the counties.

We'd like to try and move this forward to address the intended folks who could benefit. So passing with amendments number one in Section eight will retain the special fund in the measure rather than striking it out.

Second, we'll add a blank appropriation section to be matched by the counties to provide for costs related to Civil ID issuance and then make other technical amendments.

And it should provide for or should address the issues over agencies having to absorb the cost, but also provide for free Civil IDs for folks who otherwise can't afford it or have trouble accessing. So if there's no discussion about that, then. Vice Chair.

Chair's recommendation on HB177 House Draft 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with Reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. You want to House Bill 862 relates to transportation services which authorizes use of motor coaches, small buses and vans for school bus services under certain circumstances.

Later recommend moving us forward with amendments just adding a new section incorporating sections 3 and 4 from Senate Bill 586 SD1 which was previously heard in pass passed by this Committee.

And that's just with respect to the section that the bill touches adding in the zero emissions zero emissions buses and contracts down the road which been found to be way cleaner for breathability within the buses and health for those being used and because there are kids over the long run we up to a look at that.

So also has a defective date of 3,000 and goes to WHAM. So any discussion with this.

Okay. So what we're doing is putting our standard version language into the measure.

We're adding it as a or addendum to the existing bill.

Oh, okay. Some of the language the entire measure. Okay. Thank you. Chair's recommendation on HB 862 House Draft 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Moving on to House Bill 960 relating to transportation is the basically giving more flexibility over contracting and financing. Like to move this forward with amendments.

The only one actually is keeping just page 2 lines 15 through 20 rather than striking it out blanking the 2 million value therein per our legal folk and allowing for higher basically this would allow for higher capital advancement contracts above the threshold when needed through the existing process giving that flexibility.

It's also got a defective date of 3,000 as it goes to WHAM. So with that any discussion?

Yeah. Chair's recommendation on HB 960 House draft one to pass with amendments any with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measures adopted Mr. Chair.

Thanks. Finally HB 228 relating to license plates which authorizes counties to adopt rules for the use of electronic license plates and creates penalties for intentionally obscure securing license plate and prohibiting the use of license plate flipping devices. Let's move this forward.

Passing with amendments doing two things, one for the moment anyway, removing section one per some of the county testimony and then that'll give us some time to reach out to the electronic license plate folks who did not testify here.

And then finally on page two, line 20 and 21 remove the word intentional with respect to obscuring license plates. So it's just clear that if you're covering up your license plates and it's not visible, then you'd be subject to a fine. This also has a defective date of 3,000.

And we can come back to some of that in conference if we can get some answers from folks on the electronic license plates regarding some of the issues that have been raised in other states.

Chair's recommendation on HB 228 House Draft 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any noes? Measure is adopted. Mr. Chair.

All right. Thank you very much. Thank you, everybody. That is the end of our 3:02 p.m. agenda and the end of our hearing today. We are adjourned.