Senate Standing Committee on Water and Land

Good afternoon. This is the Water and Land Committee hearing for today March 14, 2025 and we welcome. Aloha Friday.

Just a reminder we ask that the testifier stand on your written testimony as well or limit the oral testimony anyway to 2 minutes and just that we will be on video of this hearing and it can be found on the Senate's YouTube channel.

We will be. Decision making will follow after the hearing from that's on the agenda today. So.

Thank you Vice Chair HB86 House Draft 2 and this is relating to the Department of Land and Natural Resources and it approves monies to DLNR the Land and Natural Resources for the establishment of a full-time equivalent permanent Makai Watch coordinator positions. Let's see we got DO care Jason or do we have.

Are you speaking on this one or Chair okay, may I bring Jason up.

With me in case you have any questions? Absolutely. Thank you very much Chair and Vice Chair Members of the Committee Dawn Chang on behalf of the Department of Land and Natural Resources we stand in support of this measure.

Mackay Watch has been a critical component but we've not actually had a position dedicated to this to this, this responsibility and the Mackay Watch is really critical on our community engagement process. So we hope that the that the Senate passes this. But I've also got Jason here, Chief Redulla Head of DO Care if you've got any questions.

And just to add. So the Makai Watch is pretty much more. Are we looking at maritime stuff or everything else?

So it's primarily a coastal state waters type of program where the volunteers will watch the shoreline for violations. However, in reality, people from the various Makai Wash programs report stuff from Mauka areas as well.

Oh, okay. Okay. Well it's rather interesting because I think communities already do that but on I guess at a time when they're available. But we will have.

Well this measure calls for a coordinator so there'll be someone I guess of making arrangements on all the areas or, or collect, I mean register these people on a community basis throughout the state.

So we actually have several communities that are Mai Watch communities where the program is active. Places like Pukea, Waimea here on, on Oahu, certain areas on the Big island in the Puako area as well as on Kauai.

The purpose of the coordinator position is to maintain interaction with these various groups and to coordinate the activities of the program statewide. Currently the program has a RCUH contracted individual who wasn't aware of that.

You already have a sort of a coordinator.

It's non-civil service position funded through RCUH. The funding sources right now, go, come from philanthropy and grant sources, which are very uncertain, which is why I think this Bill would benefit us by having a permanent civil service position with a stable funding source.

So, Senator, we've actually, this position has been with us for maybe at least five years.

Actually, over 10 years.

Excuse me, over 10 years. So many of our, for example, community based subsistence fishing areas, as they adopt rules, the Mackay Watch works alongside with them. But we do see Mackay Watch even expanding beyond just the nearshore waters. So your support of this would be greatly appreciated.

Well, we certainly need all the help we can get, particularly in areas that may not have too many activities. But there are things that happen on our shorelines. Absolutely right. Thank you very much. Thank you, Senator Elefante.

Thank you, Madam Chair. How much would you need for the position?

So the equivalent civil service job title would be a program specialist. Five with a base salary of $71,016.

Including fringe would be about 110.

Yeah, with the fringe, it would be about $110,000. Okay, thank you.

No, thank you for the question.

All right, thank you very much. Thank you. Any comments, Members? Okay, we'll proceed with the testifiers. We do have Kevin Chang on zoom.

It not present on zoom. Chair.

Okay. Oh, okay. There he is. Aloha, Kevin.

Hello, Chair. Committee Members, my name is Kevin Chang. Just testifying on behalf of Kuo Ainaulu awamua. In the 14 years I've worked here, Jason touched on it. Of 10 of those, I'm pretty sure we have pushed some kind of Bill asking for a position to become permanent civil service.

Because the communities doing this work need to have a bridge with government and also need to be trained so that when they are enforcing or not enforcing, but reporting violations on the land or in the sea, they need to build that better relationship and understand how to make those kind of reports.

And this position sort of serves, in my mind like a Konohiki role in the sense that they serve as a bridge between government and the people so that we can adequately perfect our governance of our natural resources. So this is a very important position for us and for our communities.

You may have heard of the community based subsistence fishing communities Laika, Ena, Kipuhulu and Milolii and other places. Makai Watch complements their management of this area and, and all of them have ongoing programs and want to build them. And I think a permanent position is going to strengthen that greatly.

Thank you. Good to see you, Kevin. And just as well. Kevin has been active and the testimony today is from the group Kuainaulu Au Amo. Mahalo. Thank you, Kevin. Okay.

Malama Pukukea, Waimea Jani Yagodic Sense Communication in support Nature Conservancy as well Kauhaku Ohana Association and the Hawaii Ocean Legislative Task Force and Hawaii Farmers Union as well as Hapa. And they are at least close to 14 in support of this measure. Anyone else wishes to speak to HB86. hHearing none. We'll move on to HB306.

And this is relating to the state water code penalties. It adds a minimum penalty and maximum penalty per violation of the state water code. Makes each day that a violation exists or continues to exist a separate offense. DLNR okay, Tara, you're here today. Mahalo. Good to see you.

Aloha, Chair. Vice Chair Elefante. [Hawaiian]. So we suggested amendments in our testimony. We do strongly support this bill and the ability to increase the penalties that we charge for violations of the water code. I'll just walk through the amendments that we suggested.

These are intended to provide a greater balance between the various competing interests and incorporate some of the feedback that we've been getting from stakeholders. So one of the big takeaways from our amendments is that we'd like to establish two different tiers of violation.

First tier, first time violators and people who are not causing harm to the resource to other users of the of the water resource. And the second tier would be for people who have violated before, repeat violators within the last five years or violations that do cause harm to our water resources or other users on the system.

This is intended to ensure that we have the authority to penalize people who are actually causing harm. But at the same time we can be more lenient on those who are not and those who, you know, there's no malicious intent behind the violation.

These changes would give the commission the discretion whether or not to consider each day a continuing violation and would add additional factors to be considered in assessing penalties, the volume of water being affected by the violation and the level of actual or potential harm caused by the violation.

We're also suggesting to keep the language in increasing the maximum fine per violation in every five years until 2045. But this is for the Tier 2 violations.

Those repeat violators, those that cause harm, these increases are rounded up to the nearest, you know, nice looking full number that ends with a ends with three zeros based on a 3% rate of inflation. Lastly, I just wanted to take note of. We appreciate Lahaina Strong's testimony supporting a minimum penalty.

And we also appreciate Earthjustice's concern that these penalties would be used against people like Kala farmers rather than large diverters. I also want to call out Hawaii Farm Bureau's concern for other small farmers. How do we balance these important competing interests?

We're not looking to penalize farmers who are not causing harm, whether they be Kala farmers or farming some other kind of diversified agriculture. Otherwise, I would suggest perhaps we incorporate a minimum fine only for those repeat violations that cause harm for people who, you know, they had no malicious intent, the violation was not intentional.

Those can probably be successfully resolved without the need for a minimum fine in many cases. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

Have the agency been charging or were there many violations in the last several years? That's why this measure is before us. However, I do want to note, though, this is not an administration's bill.

No, it's okay. This is. This follows the language of our administration bill. But the administration bill did not move into it. It did not make crossover. Over the last few years, our most recent fine was back in 2022, where we actually assessed a fine. I would note that most of our violations are under $5,000.

It's actually pretty rare that we will charge a fine that exceeds $5,000. But we need those increased maximums for cases where the violations are particularly egregious.

So if $5,000. And this is what year?

The last fine was in 2022? It was. It was $441,250.

Okay. So in comparison, if we're making a change to this measure, what would it come up to?

I do not have that ready, actually, for this.

The recommendation. You don't have any penalties increases for this year? For this measure?

We don't have. We do have penalty increases. Yes. For the maximum to go up to $25,000.

Is that your recommendation?

Yes.

Okay. And is that a particular violation or a major mishap or something like that?

No, no. There's. I mean, we're looking at cases like Red Hill, for example, where there are, you know, big.

Major.

Yes. Major violations. That's why I'm suggesting the two different tiers. You know, things like Red Hill should be in a tier with a higher maximum fine.

Okay. Okay. And according to this measure, I think there is a constant increase over the years. Another tier would be in 2030 and every five years thereafter. Okay. Members, any questions? Senator Elefante.

Thank you. The only question that I have in your testimony, some of the suggested Amendments that you have. So could the Commission, if it's prescribed at 25,000, 30,000, etc. Could they recommend lower amounts as well?

Absolutely.

Okay. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Okay. But we should be adding the flexibility.

Yes.

In the measure as well.

Yes.

In case you're challenged or whatever.

Yes. So at present, there's a minimum in this Bill of 50 and a maximum of 5,000 for the first tier, and we've suggested 25,000 for the second tier. So we don't have to go up to that amount in every case, and it's very likely that we won't.

Has there been any violation historically from any counties?

No.

Okay. More private.

Yes. I'll caveat that with, in all of the research that I have done, I have not found a previous violation against the Board of Water Supply. I believe there was a violation against another branch of the county in years past. I would have to find the specific violation for you, but I could get you that information. Okay.

It's not necessary. Just curious at the moment because you're actually. We haven't increased or looked at managing this particular area with regards to the responsibility of penalties. Yeah. And I guess what triggered probably the discussion today is Red Hill, but I think it's long overdue because Red Hill was what, three years ago started. Okay. All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

You'll be around in case there's any other questions. Thank you, darling. Okay. Oha. Lena Alale. Sends communication and support. I see our dear friend Ernie Lau. Yes. Aloha Ernie. Come on up.

And actually, I didn't see the proposal memos, but after reading it, I do support their proposal. I think this is reasonable.

Come. Sorry, we, ee have people on Zoom as well. I should have called you earlier. Thanks. Thanks for making time.

Thank you. Thank you. Chair and Vice Chair and Members Ernie Lau, Board of Water Supply. We support the proposal by Chair Chang and Deputy Director for the Commission. I think those are reasonable. Our testimony didn't cover that because we learned about it later. But the Commission does need tools to protect our precious freshwater resources. Mahalo.

Do you have a penalty system over there in the city, county or that you're.

I don't believe. I don't think we have a penalty system right now like this because for most part, we are a user of the resource and not take on a regulatory role. Although there is in a section in our regulations about landfills and other waste disposal facilities, which we've taken a position to protect our water resources.

Okay. So this measure gives some guidance then to all of the water supplies, I think, as well.

Yeah, no, this is. We've always asked for transparency and this is actually trying to lay it out more transparently. And also I think accounts. I believe in another hearing, I kind of raised the issue about the small farmer and how they could be impacted. So I think the DLNR is taking a balanced approach here.

First, offender versus repeat offender versus those that are knowingly doing things that would damage our resources.

Okay, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Lau? Thank you so much. We know you're a busy person. Ulupono Initiative. Aloha, Mariah.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair and members of the Committee, Mariah Yoshizu. On behalf of Ulupono Initiative, we'll stand in support of this measure. Just wanting to note that the increases will help us align across the state because currently the Department of Health can issue a 60,000 fine for water pollution. So this is based on our water quantity.

And as this is an irreplaceable resource. We want to help protect it. So we think this is a good measure to send that message. So thank you so much.

Thank you. Earth Justice. Marty, I didn't see her. Oh, you're here. Sorry. Good afternoon. Thanks, Marty.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify. My name is Marti Townsend. I'm with Earth Justice and I'm mostly here to just answer questions. You have my written testimony. Our concerns are not with the specifics of how these finds are structured. We are concerned about the sort of more. The deeper, more fundamental structural problems with the water condition. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Marti. Wayne Tanaka, IT is he on Zoom? Aloha, Wayne.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Wayne Tanaka, [unintelligible] Club of Hawaii. We, we appreciate that this measure and HB 510 later on the agenda, you know, are looking at some, you know, technical gaps in our, in our water code and our ability to manage our water resources.

I think similar to Earth Justice, we are concerned, though, that we really won't be able to get the kind of accountability that we need unless we really address the influence, the potential for special interests to influence a water commission.

And so we would urge your consideration of amendments that would help insulate the Water Commission, such as those proposed in SB3, which this committee considered earlier this session. Otherwise, I'm happy to answer any questions and thank you for your time.

Thanks, Wayne. Okay. Lerf. David Arakawa in opposition. And we do have Alahina strong in support, as well as the HAPPA alliance for Progressive Action, which is HAPPA and two other individuals is there anyone else wishes to speak to HB306 hearing? Hearing None. Let's proceed to HB316. And this is relating to the Green Jobs Youth Corps.

And this appropriates response to DLNR to continue the Green Jobs Core program. And they've been doing very, very good work over the years. Okay. Hawaii Energy State Energy Office. Aloha.

Good afternoon, Chair. Vice Chair. Senators Cameron Black, on behalf of the Hawaii State Energy Office, you have our written testimony and support.

But just wanted to state Kupu Anacore funded the first two years of our Clean Energy Wayfinders program which places trained young professionals in communities throughout the state who can provide information to businesses, schools, community Members on energy savings, renewable energy, the state's plans to shift away from fossil fuels. They all support community led planning efforts.

On the energy scale. The Wayfinders are an important resource for our outreach because they provide a presence which can help establish trust and relationships. So value our partnership with DLNR and. KUPU and thank you for the time.

Okay, Mahalo. Thanks for being here as well. Climate Change Mitigation Commission Leah Laramie. Sense Communication in support. DLNR.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Secretary. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair. Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Dawn Chang on behalf of the Department of Land and Natural Resources, we stand in strong support of HB316. The companion bill, SB20 also is consistent with this. PPU has been a major partner with us.

In fact, we have hired many of the PPU interns have turned to become state DLNR employees. So we see this as a also an opportunity for us to recruit many of our young people in Hawaii. So we are in strong support of this partnership. Thank you very much. Mahalo.

Thank you. Josh. Joshua, Holomua Collaborative thanks.

Holomua will stand on his testimony and support the measure we supported in multiple years in a row. Great.

Thank you so much. Keith. Kawika Riley with Kupu. Well received with many support groups here. Hawaii Forest Industry Association. I'm sorry. Is that, Is that you, Kawika?

Yes, that's. That's me. Chair, thank you so much. Aloha. Chair Inouye, Vice Chair, Elefante and honorable Committee Members. I'm Kawika Riley with the nonprofit Kupu. We've submitted testimony and strong support. We'll stand on our testimony as requested and just want to thank you very much for hearing this important bill and we are available to answer any questions.

Mahalo.

Thank you so much, Kawika. Guy Jalier, Hawaii Forest Industry in support Malama Pupukea Waimea, Jenny Yakovich in support. And we have Kua in support Hawaii Farmers Union 350 Hawaii of course, Hawaii Energy testifying for elemental impacts. We do have 17 individuals in support of this measure. And is anyone else here wishes to speak to HB 360. Hello.

Hello Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, I'm Elizabeth Benyshek with the Nature Conservancy. We submitted written testimony. You should have it. But I just wanted to highlight that like many organizations, the Nature Conservancy has. Had dozens of cuckoo interns and they've helped expand our capacity to manage our forested watersheds and our coral reefs.

The Green Job Youth Corps is vital for building our workforce and growing our sustainably focused industries across the state. So thank you for the time to speak.

Thank you for being here. Appreciate that. Anyone else wishes to speak to HB316 hearing none. Let's proceed to HB506. And this is relating to Conservation enforcement. And this appropriates funds for equipment for the Oahu Branch of, and this is the Division of Conservation and Resource Enforcement of DLNR.

And Jason, are you speaking on your behalf or both of you?

Both of us will be here.

Okay.

Thank you very much. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Dawn Shang, on behalf of the Department, you know, DOCARE this we stand in support and I do want to stand on our testimony, but I'd like to add some. We recently have a Makai. You just did our Makai watch Bill.

But DOCARE has been expanding their operations on the Makai side. You have been very generous. The Legislature has been very generous to DOCARE. But we realize and more in particular the protection of coral reefs, the protection of our nearshore resources is critical to sustainability.

So empowering DOCARE with the tools and equipment that they need to manage and enforce will be critical to the future of Hawaii as well. But Jason is here to answer any questions but also provide comments.

We can, and thanks Jason. As well as the chair mentioned, we have added a lot more personnel in the last 2, 3 years and so has all the the training and everything's been done? Or are we looking at a new group of officers coming online or where are we?

So yes, Chair again, Jason Redula, enforcement chief. Our most recent recruit class graduated this past December 2024.

You had how many?

We had 25 in that class. They are currently finishing up their field training officer program and they'll be able to go on solo patrol here in April. You folks were very generous to do care. You provided us with 20 additional conservation and resource enforcement officer positions. We are working right now to establish those positions.

And once we can get them established, we're going to go for recruiting.

So the upcoming, I guess, session.

More than likely, if we get those positions established rather quickly and get them into the recruitment queue, we'll probably start recruiting in the next few months.

All right. Okay. Good luck and thanks for all of what you do. However, now this particular Bill only covers the appropriations for equipment for Oahu. Now, but with all the recruitments that been happening, weren't they dispersed statewide, though?

Yes, those positions in the past have all had positions that were dispersed statewide throughout the four counties.

Okay. But the equipment needs are more here than all of your other island offices,

I think Chair, with respect to this particular Bill, the impetus was the initiation of the herbivore rules specific to Mauna Loa Bay.

And that's why the Bill has Oahu centric language.

Okay.

I see, I see. Okay. I was wondering about that. Yeah. Separation of distinction.

We do hope to be back and expand to all of the other islands, but this is probably a priority.

Sure. Understand.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much, Senator Elefante.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And follow up to Madam Chair's line of questioning. How far are we away from coverage other than during daylight hours? Would the 20 additional established positions help you with nighttime enforcement for doing night hours?

It would certainly do that, Senator. I would just say statewide right now we are working nights. Okay. We have officers on duty in all four counties nightly to about midnight right now and with specifically to West Oahu.

Given the past concerns of the increased violence this past summer and into the fall, we are continuing to have an overnight presence in West Oahu on a daily basis from about 8 o' clock at night to 4 o' clock in the morning.

Okay, so this would sort of supplement what you have with the new recruits coming in?

Yes, it would.

Okay, thank you.

Okay. Just a short statement from you just to keep up with my island. Banyan Drive. Now that we've secured country club on Banyan Drive, can you bring us up to date? Where. Where are we? I understand the barricades have been up. And what's next?

What I can speak to Chair is DOCARE Officers are continuing a 24:7 security watch on the country club property at this point with respect to the perimeter fence that was supposed to go up. Frankly, yeah, I'm not sure, Chair, to be honest with you.

Okay, so, yeah, I think romantic vision is also here. Do we have any updates on that, Durazo?

Plan was to procure.

Okay, so with that said, that you haven't had the fence and we have had. Of course, we all know the homeless situation, and that's why DOCARE. And thanks for already, at the closing of the contract with the lessor immediately. I think you were already there, so that's a concern.

So looking at the fan situation, you got monies for it or what? You have to use your own. Oh, okay. For the fencing and see what happens thereafter.

But thank you for the question. Senator, we are looking at the condition of the building. I think there's an agreement that we should be looking towards demolition.

Yes.

So we're looking at trying to.

We're trying to help you get $14 million. We need.

I know. Thank you so much.

So that way, because right now we're spending a disproportionate amount of money with having security there and paying for fencing. But if we can move more timely towards demolition, that would be helpful, and we thank you for your support.

Well, the thing is that just the concern of getting that refresh out of the way, you know, that's the goal. So I'm glad you folks are there and the Hilo officers, I guess they're 24 hours.

Yes. Specific to country club. Yes.

Okay. All right. Thanks so much. Thank you. Further questions. For this measure, HB506, we've had many, many testifiers, 25 in support, and we thank all of you. However, we're going to move on to the next measure. And this is HB510. And this is relating to the declaration of water shortage and emergency.

This amends the conditions, manner, and areas in which the Commission on Water Resource Management can declare and provide notice of water shortages and emergencies. Diora, are you going to be on this measure? Yes, ma' am. All right.

Good afternoon. Kira Kahane, DLNR across the State of Hawaii, droughts have been increasing in both duration and intensity. So this bill is intended to give the Commission the tools that it needs to effectively address water shortages, which, frankly, are going to become more common in the future decades.

We have proposed amendments again to try to strike more of a balance with some of the other interests and some of the groups that we've been been getting feedback from throughout this process.

So we were proposing amendments to limit the duration of a water shortage declaration to 90 days, after which time the Commission might take action to extend the water shortage declaration if the circumstances warrant. In most cases, surface water is very reactive. You know, depending on the rain, the shortage could be over within 90 days.

Whereas for groundwater, we might have to take it back to the Commission for a few extensions before the shortage situation resolves itself. We're also proposing to cap the potential reductions to permit holders at 20% of the permit holders last reported monthly pumping for groundwater.

So groundwater users within the State of Hawaii report how much water they're using to us. This is based off of our Pearl Harbor water shortage plan for groundwater within that aquifer sector, which provides for a maximum of a 20% reduction in water use. And that's only for the lowest priority permits, if necessary.

If these measures are inadequate to protect the public health or resources in a shortage scenario, if a greater than 20% increase is necessary, the statute already gives the Commission the authority to order further measures depending on the finding of an emergency.

So we believe that that is going to give some reassurance to folks that there will be a limit to the amount that the Commission is going to be able to reduce their water usage unless there is absolutely an emergency that necessitates further action. We have a couple of other minor amendments.

One is to remove the impacts of the climate crisis as a criteria for water shortage declarations. Climate change may very likely lead to further shortages, but it's not the only factor we'd be looking at.

So with that, I'd just like to note that we are going to be establishing criteria for water shortages and classifying the permits that would be reduced through a rulemaking process that would provide the maximum amount of public involvement and stakeholder input. So I'm available if you have any questions. Thank you for listening.

When you talk about permits, who are you issuing permits to?

So within a water management area, it would be water use permits for groundwater or surface water users.

Okay, so when you talk about that particular area, give us an example, because you already have residents around this entire state. Yes. Okay. Yes.

So what would you. So for Oahu, almost all of Oahu is already designated as a groundwater management area. So any withdrawal of groundwater already has a permit. The other kind of permits that we issue outside of water management areas are for wells and for stream diversion works.

So those would be the two other types of permits that we would be looking at outside of a water management area in places like Kauai, for example, where there is no designation.

All right, any questions? Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay. Low Board of Water Supply.

Aloha Chair and Vice Chair, Members. Ernie Lau, Board of Water Supply. We strongly support this proposed bill that would change the requirements for a water shortage declaration water shortage and actually do it by rule, which will allow, I think, a more public transparent process that we can provide input.

Just looking at the changes that the Deputy Director covered, I think we're okay with the changes too and can support them.

Okay. Question and I'm not sure I thought I heard sewer mentioning is there a charge going to be penalized if anything happens?

I am not sure if I'll defer to the Commission. Okay, respond. If they will utilize the penalties. Yes. That are talked about in the other bill. Should. Should a user not comply with the shortage plan?

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Senator Elefante.

Yes. I have a question and just going back to my time on the county, I know border water supply, you folks have limit or waivers on two 1H's or approval of affordable housing.

So do you look at, say for instance the Pearl Harbor water shortage plan and draw data from that to make decisions on how much the amount of waivers that you folks give for 21 HS.

Basically how we approach water shortage right now is to actually look at how our system's operating. Our wells are keeping up with the demand and the hours of operation of our wells for 201H projects, it's a deferral of when they actually would have to pay the fees to the border water supply.

The largest amount being the water system facilities charge. We do have a waiver program for affordable housing units. Up to 500 units a year will waive the.

That number hasn't changed. It's still 500.

No.

Okay. Okay. Thank you, manager. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Thanks, Ernie. Okay. Marty Townsend Earth Justice.

Thank you.

Aloha Chair Inouye, Vice Chair Elefante. My name is Marty Townsend with this Earth Justice and we have serious concerns about passing this bill without more substantive changes to the structure of the water Commission.

We have already experienced situations where you know those who are politically well connected have used their influence to interfere with the proper management of our water resources. This particular bill giving the Commission the ability to declare water shortages is ripe for abuse in that kind of context.

And so while I agree with the other testifiers that we need the Water Commission to be prepared to issue water shortages when there are emergencies right now, they are not set up to do that.

Well, and if we just give this kind of authority without fixing some of the underlying challenges that we have been raising for years now, I think it will go to further undermine public trust in the Water Commission, which we don't want to do.

So my recommendation is to please defer this Bill right now, allow the interim to work out some of these more substantive changes and come back next session and fix this.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any questions for Justice? Thank you, Marty. Thank you. Sierra Club. Wayne, are you on it? Thanks.

Good afternoon. Wayne Tanaka, the Sierra Club.

You know, similar to our past comments, our previous comments on HB306, you know, we recognize that this addresses technical need, but we are also like, are just as concerned that we're not going to necessarily ensure equitable response to a water shortage or emergency unless we make some of the structural changes again that were proposed in SB3 to kind of insulate the Water Commission from the influence of special interests.

Otherwise happy to answer any questions you may have and thank you for allowing me to testify.

Thanks. Wayne Lirf, Land Use Research. David Arakawa in opposition, Hawaii Farm Bureau in opposition. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to HB510? We'll move along. And this is HB649, House Draft 1. And this is relating to the small boat hoppers. And, and this establishes the Small Boat Harbor Commercial Vessel Special Fund.

Increases moorage fees for commercial vessels, requires revenue from the fee increase be used by the Department of Land and Natural Resources for improvements that primarily benefit commercial vessels that utilize small boat harbors. Dlnr thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Dawn Chang. On behalf of the Department of Land and Natural Resources, we're going to stand on our written testimony. I also have Megan Stats here who's available to answer any questions.

We do appreciate the House coming up with this bill, creative measures to try to generate more fees or more funds for DOAR, but we feel the more appropriate method may be rather than to establish a new special fund. We currently have our own an existing special fund and we do have some concerns about issuing GEO bonds.

But then maybe the more practical Approach may be to increase the percentage of fees from 3% to 5%. Okay.

All right. Okay. Megan, anything to add? Nothing to add. Thank you, Chair. Similarly. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay. Calypso chart Charters on Zoom it. Zachary lapred not present.

Chair.

All right. In opposition, Holo Holo Charters on Zoom. Daniel Hazen. Aloha.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair and Member of the Committee. My name is Daniel Hazen. Holo Holo Charters on the southwest side of Kauai. In opposition of this bill. I understand the DLNR needs funds to repair and upkeep our harbors.

I just fail to see how the creation of a new fund would help get that done when existing resources lie within the current special fund are not being used. 3 to 5% might seem like a small number to most people, but that's a 66% increase in a fixed cost.

And I just asked the Committee if a fund is going to be created, if increases are going to happen, that at least we tier those increases and not make that 66% jump. Thank you.

Thank you very much. On Zoom it, we have. The. Let's see. Activities and Attractions Association, Antoinette Davis. Aloha, Antoinette. Proceed.

Aloha. Yes, thank you for this opportunity. Chair, Vice Chair and Member of the Committee. We are opposed to this bill. I kind of went sideways on my testimony.

I mean, I would stand on it, but after reading it, I realized I really just dove into a dark hole of the lack of clarity in financial reporting. I have been trying to get Lahaina harbor finances from the state prior to the fire. There's great reporting. Now that's up on DoBoard. That goes bi-quarter.

It raises a lot of eyebrows though, if you look at it by harbor, what it is. Essentially, we oppose this. There is a process that used to exist prior to Don Chang. I think it was back in. Might have been Tim John's days. That was called an advisory board.

That was by facility, by resource, and it was recreational users, commercial users, together with the community of that place. And they would come up with what needed to be done and prioritize things.

At that time, there wasn't the ppp, the private public partnership that now exists, that DLNR could do, having that and bringing that to those advisory boards. We would actually, I mean, what's, what's very dysfunctional about our harbors and our ramps is that there isn't this unity and collective ambition of getting things fixed anyway. We, we oppose it.

5% is just. The economy is not in a place where they can actually do this either. And I would urge you to look at the financials that are online on DoBoard's website. They don't make sense. Lahaina harbor is losing half $1.0 million and it's not even open.

Thanks, Antoinette. And thank you for your table. And also, that's pretty dated. Tim Johns was the Director back in 2000 up to 1998, I think, when I came here, up to 2000 during the Cayetano. So that's a long time ago. But thank you anyway. Also, Denver Coon, are you still there with us on Zoom?

Yes. Chair Good afternoon. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Denver Coon here on behalf of the Ocean Tourism Coalition. We are testifying in opposition to the bill. Those who just spoke, I think they raised a lot of points. You know, a lot of people look at this as a maybe look at this as a 2% increase.

The commercial operators, we look at that as, you know, 67% increase. And you know, with visitor numbers right now in Hawaii, they're, you know, they're less than what they were in 2019. There just hasn't been a lot of good news on the economy over the last couple months.

So all of us operators across the state are just very worried where this goes and whether, you know, it's appropriate time to be increasing, you know, the gross receipts fee that's going to affect everybody's margins that are, you know, already single digits, particularly, you know, the law operations. Maui after the fire down more than 40%.

So we would just ask the Committee, you know, take a look at, you know, whether or not the timing of this bill is correct. We, you know, one thing I do like the idea of fun, you know, making sure that the money is going to be used for the infrastructure.

But I would still also like to see more information on the exact projects and to make sure that, you know, there are some operators that don't use the big facilities, big harbors and, and make sure that if they're paying that they're also seeing a return on this investment. So thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you, Denver. We've received as well close to there's 29 in opposition and pretty much just one support. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to HB649? Let's move on. And I think this next one will be a little more discussions on HB 800. And this is relating to government.

It provides for the transfer of certain parcels in the Liliha Civic center area and Iwali Fire Station area from various state agencies to the sitting County of Honolulu.

It provides for the transfer of the parcel of land in which Iwali Place is sited from the City of County of Honolulu to the State and repeals the Sunset provision of Act 4.

And it requires sitting county to accept the properties transferred in satisfaction of all amounts owed by HHFTC under the Kapolei Roadways, Drainage and Sewer Settlement. Very interesting discussion on this measure. Another attempt to try to get Iwali Tower to the State. All right, HHFTC.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Dean Minamami with HHFDC. We stand on our testimony, support and available questions.

Okay. Questions with regards to interesting about the Kapolei roadways and the drainage and the sewers. Now, my understanding is that project has been there quite a while. How many years was Kapolei?

It was coming up starting in the about 2000. So it's been 25 years since it was started development.

2000 actually 1990s.

1990S.

Yeah. Okay. So all right. Now the reason for this exchange actually, I guess we, I think we'll hopefully is somebody from city and county here not on this measure. Okay. All right. So rather interesting because my understanding is they may not be in agreement the city and County of this transfer to accept as is.

But then I understand there might be an opportunity at this time to have a difference of something old with that development to the standards of roads to this century. So I, I can see if it's kind of confusing, but some background information. Yes. Okay, let's see what he says and then we'll call El Senator.

Okay. Yes. The villages of Kapolei was built under Act 15. So under Act 15, HHFDC didn't require city approval to build the roads, to get subdivision approval, for example. So back in the 1990s, HHFDC actually permitted its own roads. They permitted some of the initial homes are being built in Kapolei.

And the city basically had concerns about that and said that they wouldn't accept any infrastructure in the in Kapolei at that point. And that has been their position until recently where they said that if we improve the rules to a standard they find acceptable, then they will accept them.

And to improve the rules to their standards means basically resurfacing the roads, fixing any defects in sidewalks, fixing any defects in the drainage system of a new.

Community because the standards that period were not like the standards that the county would accept to today's.

Well, it's extensive rehabilitation work that's required, which is why we estimate It'll be between $90 million to $100 million to do all of the requested work or.

If the city and county decides to accept, but they accept that funding back to. From the state to the county, then.

They have asked if they will take the roles in as is condition for $60 million.

Okay. Senator Elefante?

Yeah, I have the same questions that chair has. So in it's mentioned about a settlement. So was a settlement a court order or a settlement between mutual parties?

There's. Well, there's been negotiations okay, so we have an MOA with the city right now that was executed, I think two or three years ago, whereby if we bring the roads up to a standard that the city finds acceptable, then the city will take over maintenance of the roads. Okay, so we've done.

The first batch of roads was completed about a year ago.

So HH FDC is already bringing it up to better standards.

The first set of roads about a year ago. Yes. That was a cost of about, I think 10 or $15 million. Okay.

But the city is willing to, even though the appraisal might be 90 to 100 million, they're willing to accept it at 60 for the current conditions? Yes. Even though you're doing repairs to some of the roads?

Yes. We asked them, well, would you pick the roads in as is condition? What, what is that an option? They said, well, for $60 million they would.

Yeah. But you know what they're gaining all. How many, how many homes?

4,000 homes.

4,000 homes. And they've already, over the years, they've already had how much in real property tax income.

Yes.

Interesting.

Yeah. And then as a. So as a follow up to that, the, in the city's testimony from the managing Director, their other concern has to do with Ali'i Place. Right. And so that. Does HHFDC have any, do they have a role in that or is just more the Kapolei Parkway?

Just a couple a roadways. We don't have any.

That's your portion. I think that's more deal in our area. Believe. Yeah. Okay. Okay. That helps me understand it better. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good. Maybe we can, we can receive more clarity with regards to more of the testifiers coming out. DLNR, Luke is here or you? Durazo and I are here. Okay.

Good afternoon, chair and Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Dawn Chang, on behalf of the Department. I also have Durazo Tsuji here. I'll put in to answer any questions. So, you know, I think we support the intent of the bill. We know that some things need to be done.

In particular, the capital is going to have to be replaced. Sure. But we do, we do have some questions regarding wanting to make sure that the Legislature fully understands what we're acquiring at Ali'i Place. Because we only own the ground or they only own the ground. Yeah, it's own city and county.

Yeah, they don't own the, they don't own the building. So. And we don't know what the current condition of the building is or what the current vacancy in terms. So that's Kind of our concern.

Understanding. Yeah. I I the Perhaps maybe we can get a little more clarity to this measure with DAGS. I know who's representing DAGS today, and thanks, folks. We'll get back to you, folks. You'll be around. Okay. But I can see, though, you know, with this measure, there's a lot of details, and my thought with regards to.

And I'm sure in my discussions with DAGS, you know, Ali'i place, I mean, we all know that the state had an opportunity several years ago under the IGA Administration. However, and at that time, when I spoke with Mr. Reagan, was that exactly Chair Chang, what you brought up about what the future for this building, on vacating.

If we're looking at four years down the line, we'll have to move out and do we have a place. But, you know, there's so many other things, other factors that are in place right now with regards to the lessors and the lessor and the lessees. My understanding. But I understand, DAGS, you are, you did.

You are in support of the measure?

The Department is in support, yes.

Okay. Can you add further?

Okay. First, let me introduce myself, Gordon Wood, DAGS Public Works Administrator. If you have specific questions, I can certainly try to respond. But our support of this measure goes in several ways. First, of course, Ali'i Place would be a convenient opportunity for us if and when we have to empty out this building.

Second, the city is trying to develop a civic center in Loliha area, and some of the lands involved in this are in that area and would make it, I think, easier for the city to develop that civic center by removing various state agencies with whom they now have to interact on that.

And that's why Liliha is mentioned, the fire station and Ala Park. It's really interesting, Aala park. And some of us may not know it. I thought the city owned it, but with that one park, half of the park is owned by the city and half of the other side is owned by the state.

So that was kind of interesting how that happened.

Yeah, there are a lot of anomalies like that.

Okay, so so far. So our portion of the Ala park will go to the city if they agree on this measure.

That's my understanding.

They agree with what the proposal is with regards to Ali'i Tower, then. Senator Elefante.

Yeah. Just one quick question, Mr. Wood. So I know there's multiple state agencies involved, and who is the lead from the state in terms of. Because there's a lot of moving parcels here.

Okay. On the state side, we have a transit Oriented sort of workforce that is, that is led by dved's Office of Planning and Sustainable Development.

So they're the point.

They're the state's point on that and they serve as an organizing point for all of the agencies that are involved in that development. Yeah.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. So now my understanding, the Bristol Group are the owners of the building. Correct. Okay. And the city owns the land as well. The majority city in county, I understand Corp. Council is there, Hart is there, prosecutors is there and the majority of the properties or the floors are and probably more. But the what's.

I guess the discussions is I can see the benefit to this measure. I would delete any reference to the couple A and the arrangement for the. For the community at Kapolei and HHFDC in this measure and not part of an agreement for the purchase, I would think.

I think it's kind of like too confusing and the demands of bringing the AAA subdivision up to speed and up to standards is going to be too costly. And I'm sure, I'm sure the city probably would not be obligated to make improvements, but they sure are benefiting with the property taxes.

But I can see the benefits of the building itself. Any further discussions? Yes. Yes. Senator DeCorte.

You know, originally this question was for DLNR, but I think you'll be able to answer it since this is a public trust lens. Does this affect revenue for OHA? This is an impact revenue for OHA.

You know, I think that is a better question from DLNR.

We'll wait until they. Yeah, she can come up. Okay. Sorry about that.

Yes. So I looked over at Durazo. I think both of us agree, concur. This is, this is not public trust.

I understand it's not public trust.

Okay. Very much so. If, if something like this would happen, would be accepted the money committees and things would be rolling. I know Sitting county already testified they're in opposition. However, to keep the measure alive and some communications with decision makings at the end, I can see some benefit. So then, okay, Sitting county owns a land.

So then if things work out, then you would be under your jurisdiction for the land portion, then just for the acquisition.

I don't think that DNR is intending to be the land manager.

Yes, but just. But the land part would be the state. Right? Would be the state. Okay. And then everything else with regards to the building and whatever happens and.

But I can see though that there is going to be a lot of, I guess, decision making because you have, you have the owner of the building and then you have all of these lessees. That's there. Now do we have any arrangement with the garage, the parking from the state?

There is. There is Reserve parking because remember, this is part of that transaction involving one capital. So. So there is public parking there. Reserve parking for the state in that building. There's.

Okay. State employee park here. I think of DCCA employees part their agreement.

At no charge or whatever. Charge, whatever. Like we do here.

I actually think. Well, I think as far as paying the landlord, I don't, I don't think they. I don't. I'm not sure, but I don't think there's a charge there. I think that employees pay because we all pay. Yes, yes. It's like a tax management. Yes, yes. But there's a section of parking, employee parking. How many spaces?

430 something. I understand, I think from. Based on some. Wow. That's all the state public. No, there's, there's. From what I understand again, these are old documents that we're trying to piece together. Yeah. Long time ago. Yeah. It looks like there was like 200 something stalls for public parking. Right, right. 400 something stalls for state employees.

And there's some stalls, a few stalls for the county. But also the county also has ground floor space. You know, the prosecutor's office was at the prosecutor's office. The Police Commission and maybe another agency. But it's county space at the bottom. That I believe the deal was.

My understanding I may be incorrect, but I don't think they pay rent for that.

Okay. Okay.

But if we were to acquire it, I believe, I'm assuming the building. If it's going to be a state owned building. Yes. I'm assuming it's going to be managed by DAGS. I'm sure Quirky situation here is normally DAGS manage building with state employees here you'll have.

At least in the beginning you'll have people leasing it from the outside.

Well, that's the issue that we have to I guess manage and decide looking at what's. What's to take place as well. Now there was a City Council resolution that was kind of interesting done in 2019, urging the City Administration to initiate condemnation proceedings for the Ali'i Place ground lease. Now it was kind of interesting.

I'll leave it to you guys so we can look at it and just keep. For the records. Yeah.

I don't know if I was there. You were there. Okay.

Did you pass it or? Did it ever pass or? I don't think so.

I Don't remember. Okay. I don't. I don't think it did. I could be wrong though.

Okay. And they attempt at that time, but they already own the land. I mean the property. So what was.

I think part of that during that time, Madam Chair, was the City Council was looking to relocate to Ali'i Place at that point in time.

Acquiring the building. Yeah.

Yeah. But maybe they're acquiring the building. You know that. Yes, yes.

So I think that. And you're right, Senator, that is a really big outstanding question. Yes. Because whatever obligations is by the lessor of the building because they own the building. That will have to be negotiated. Now, whether that's a condemnation. So there's a lot of. Right. Uncertain questions. No. Okay, sure.

Yeah. It's kind of interesting. It'll take a couple of years to massage this. Yeah. To untangle all of this, however. But you gotta. We all know that like I can imagine. And we all know that on the EO case that they were there recent.

It's not like 10 years, but it was when they had to move out of their several places. So you know, then we don't know what the lease arrangements have. You know, how many years. Probably have options.

Okay. All right. Vice Chair, just to clarify, I think you had a question earlier about who's a lead agency. Just for your info on the state parcels that we identified that's supposed to go over to the county already. The city already has management jurisdiction via a governor's EO for most of them. Okay.

I think there's only two parcels, one of them on the HHFDC, which I believe they lease for. Okay. Affordable housing or LG housing. And the other one was that DAGS property that they were looking to create with Civic Center.

Okay. And I just. Madam Chair, real quickly, I have a two part question related to this. So is it necessary that all these TMKs are included in sort of this one Bill as part of the settlement? Or could that be separated and apart settlement mean or like a negotiation? Yeah, because it.

How I understand it, it seems like it's all in one. You have the Coppola Parkway, you have Ali'i Place, and you have the Liliha parcels. And it's like all bunched together to get the city to negotiate and transfer. It's. Yeah. So it's like a lot of.

Now that this measure is. Is Liliha and the fire station and the park.

Yep. Okay. Institute for Human Services. So there's like about 246 and I. What I do want to clarify is this Isn't a deal in our Bill. So this. So. So some of. Some of the identification of the parcels. What was the intention behind this? We were not necessarily privy to. So. Yes, so.

So that is sort of our challenge. I mean I can get change as well. Yes. So I think we were looking. We saw ourselves as helping with the acquisition. But beyond that the actual. Because I think there is good intent. My understanding from. Is that there's.

The state is already leasing from private commercial businesses about 300,000 square foot and that Ali'i Place would provide for that because there are many other departments that need to move. So. But whether. Like you said, there's a lot of issues that need to be addressed in this one. Okay. All right. If I may.

Yes. The second part to that is I know Dylan, are you still had concerns with ground lease would be responsible for that. So those concerns still remain in your written testimony or the fact that there.

Is a ground lease. And we don't. We don't really understand the terms and conditions. Okay. Maybe that we don't know. I think actually it probably has. I think it has one option from the last I read. But okay. Option to extend. I'm sorry.

Understood. Thank you, Madam Chair.

All right. Okay. Yeah. This will be many discussions going forward. Okay. Sitting. County of Honolulu is not here as well, but they're in opposition. Okay. And Pacific Housing Assistance Corporation. Dixon Lee, any sense communication with comments. Okay. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to HB 800 hearing? None. Let's move on to HB 1137.

And this is relating to restoration of beachlands. And this amends a definition of beach restoration to include activities undertaken to maintain and improve eroded beaches and degraded dune systems through the management of sand and native vegetation, placement of sand, activities undertaken to remove abandoned remnant materials that pose a risk to public and ecosystem health. Okay. DLNR.

Good afternoon, Chair, Members of the Committee, Dawn Chang on behalf of the Department. I also have Michael Caine here if we have any questions. This is an administrative Bill. What you see before you, HB 1137, the draft that you're reviewing.

And we stand in strong support of that because all it does is change the definition of beach restoration to broaden it to permit us to do a lot of the things that we are currently doing, but it is beyond the current definition. So as the Bill that's been presented to you. We do

Stand in strong supporting of this Bill.

Thank you. Thank you. All right, let's see. Sitting County of Honolulu Climate Office, Office of Climate Change. Benjamin Sullivan in support. Okay. The Association of Apartment Owners of Hololani, Mihoko.

Thank you, sir. We'll stand on our testimony providing comments and requests.

Statement clarifying amendment.

Thank you. And in your testimony, did you have amendments as well? Thank you. Mai Nui Resiliency Hui. Are you on Zoom? Kai Nishiki or.

Aloha chair, vice chair, and committee members. We stand on our testimony, but we would definitely recommend an amendment to section two to not include the stabilizing structures as part of the definition.

And if this body intends to mirror any of the changes in the companion bill that were made yesterday, we would strongly oppose the inclusion of section 3 if that is this body's intent. Mahalo.

Can I ask you a question? Was that the Senate Bill you're saying that was heard yesterday? Is that is. Was that 1456?

Correct. Intend to mirror any of the additions that were made.

You're in opposition of what the house did?

If. Yes. If you. If you choose to mirror. We strongly oppose to inclusion of section three.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Surf Rider Foundation. Hannah Lilly in support. The Waikiki Beach Special Improvement District in support. Yes. In total we have nine in support with no opposition. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to HB 1137. Hearing none, let's move on to HB 1141.

House Draft 1, relating to updating public land leases issued pursuant to Chapter 171 of the HRS. And this requires that lease extensions approved by the BLNR be drafted on forms that reflect contemporary leasing practices and policies of the board and which shall control over conflicting or inconsistent provisions in the lease being extended. DLNR.

Yes. This is an administrative bill. And this is actually consistent based upon the recommendations by the audit report in 1912 as well as the House Investigative Committee. So we stand in strong support of this measure.

Thank you very much. Chair. Vice Chair.

And this is a governance?

And I also have Durazo Tsuji if you have any specific questions.

Thank you. All right. Patrick Kahawaiolaa. I should know that name. He's my constituent. Kahawaiolaa sent communication with comments. Is anyone else wishes to speak to HB 1141? Senator Elephant.

I have a quick question for DLNR. Yeah. So thank you, Chair Chang and administrator. So my understanding and how I read this is because of the auditor's findings and the court case I believe.

Oh, yeah. We are relying on another House investigation Committee.

You have to use a standard form for for any.

No, the investigative. The auditor's report and the Investigative Committee recommended that we use the most updated form. The Kahua Ranch case. That said, that distinguished whether it's a public auction or negotiation. So what we're trying to say is they should all be treated the same.

Same. Okay, understood.

And current foreign language.

Yeah, because some of the old leases are really out there.

Okay, thank you.

No, thank you.

All right, thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to HB 1141? We'll move on then to HB 1278. And this is relating to hazardous tree removal. It appropriates funds for the assessment and removal of hazardous trees on state lands across Hawaii. That's a big state. DLNR.

Thank you very much chair, vice chair, and members of the committee. Dawn Chang on behalf of the department. I also have Jenny here with our DOFAS staff. We do stand in support of this measure. It does help us address, you know, the cost associated with hazardous tree removal is considerable.

So we would appreciate an appropriation to help us manage that.

Okay. Now, but you're already doing some mitigation, right? Now, whatever is out there and then you assess the situation and knowing that it's hazardous, you automatically just go ahead and do your job, right?

We do, but. Oh, excuse me, sorry. Jenny Grimm. Aloha chair, vice chair, members of the committee, Jenny Grimm, Forestry Program Manager, Division of Forestry and Wildlife. We. We do, but it's, it's funny, it's. It's both predictable.

We know we're going to have hazard trees, but it's also unpredictable because we don't know how much will fall each year, whether it'll be storm damage, whether there'll be extremely complicated cases where you're, you know, we've got wires or property involved.

So it's really variable how much money of our general funds will have to be spent on hazard trees each year. So it's really hard to predict and allocate those funds. And those funds go to all our management needs. So this would put a part that really good.

It's only covering the forest, though, and only hazardous trees. So doesn't include forest mitigation, fire suppression. Doesn't include that. It's only when.

But these are lands that's considered forest, though. It says state owned forests.

It's forests. It's the boundary. It's the boundary trees, right. Or along roads usually.

Or in a subdivision if there's a fence and the backside is the state.

Right. And a big tree falls down. Yes. So sometimes this is to help us prevent that from happening, if we can identify or timely respond when a tree has fallen.

Okay. Now also with regards to the private subdivisions, but then it's. And if it's owner occupied and there's some hazard, I mean, the tree got to come down if there is some activity close by or like the school or whatever. So if there's no occupancy in a particular private home or residence, who's responsible for that? The counties?

No.

The private owner.

Yeah.

Okay. All right. Okay, thank you. Any questions? Senator DeCorte.

So would this kind of be maybe Albizia trees? That might be a good example, being that they're so vulnerable when it comes to high winds and high storms that would be in forestry areas.

Potentially. Potentially the edge trees or Albizia. But it could be any senescing or damaged tree that's, you know, leaning, falling.

So right now the department is removing hazardous trees just on the funding that you folks already have. So how would this extra funding. What are we missing without the extra funding?

As example, be a dedicated source to address this so that it doesn't deplete our financial ability to address many of the other issues.

Okay. I noticed the appropriations were blanked out, but any dollar amount estimate?

Roughly, I think Oahu. It was between 30 and 50 per island.

Really? Okay.

30,000 to. Per island.

To island. So many times.

So any. Any range from 30,000 to 50,000.

I think the total was about 100,000 a year. So it was not a huge. I was trying to get that, actually. But it mostly goes to arborists and, you know, contractors.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Mahalo. All right, anyone else wishes to speak to HB 1278? We did receive communications from Maui Brewing Company, restaurants, Big Island Invasive Species, and an individual, Larry Smith, in support. Anyone else wishes to speak to HB 1278? Hearing none, let's proceed then with HB 1348. This is relating to public lands.

Requires blnr to lease public lands for recreation, residence use by public lottery and restrict participation in the public lottery to residents of the county in which the leased land is located. And Members, we did hear SB 1517 that I believe is went over to the house and we passed with amendments as well. Okay.

DLNR on HB 1348 Again, good afternoon.

Chair and Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Dawn Chang here on behalf of the Department. I also have Ellen Carpenter with our State parks. Lack of better words. I think what. What triggered this was the coca cabin visas. And so we do stand in support of this measure.

We believe it would be create greater equity and promote those who live on the island to be able to more fairly participate in those leasing processes. So we're available if you have any questions.

Thank you. Koge Leasehold Leaseholder Association. Chipper Wichman on Zoom. Aloha, Chipper. We can't hear you. Chipper your volume.

Okay. Okay, that's good. Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Aloha, Chair. Mahalo so much for hearing our bill and, and thank you for your support of our companion bill 1517 that you just referred to.

We, I stand on my testimony, but I want to emphasize in the bottom of Chair Chang's testimony that, that you just read, she referred to the fact that Senate Bill 1517, after it left your Committee went into Judiciary and Senator Rhoads only held decision making. So there was no verbal testimony at that time.

And he amended that bill to a Shorter Period of 5 years with no. You know, it really confounded all of us in the community because there was no input from anybody in that direction. Chair Chang has stated in her testimony that's that's not a good amendment.

And while that's not reflected in the House Bill that's before you, probably the next stop for HB 1348 is going to be Judiciary. So any influence you have to ensure that this one does not get that amendment, we really appreciate it. You've been very supportive.

Yes. But I'd like to clarify, though, that I concurred with the amendment and in order for the judiciary who don't hold hearings, once it goes to the Ways and Means Committee or a Judiciary, they don't hold hearings and they rely on the committees.

But I did concur with him from the 25 years to five years because I wanted to keep the measure alive. Otherwise, if I did not concur with that, it would probably have floated away and not be heard. So it's a matter of. And we already knew that the House measure was still alive as well.

Okay. Well, thank you for explaining that. I really appreciate it because, yes, this is pretty. I've been doing this for many, many years and it's really been fantastic to see both of these bills going through Both chambers with 100% support and total community and DLNR alignment.

So thank you for your support. Understanding. We're fighting for time right now. We got two more measures. We did receive about 31 in support of this measure and no opposition. So with that said, the last aloha call. Anyone else wishes to speak to HB 1348? Okay, hearing none. Let's move over to HB 1316, House Draft 2.

And this is relating to the DLNR beginning January 12026 requires rental vessels to be registered and numbered by DLNR before being rented or leased or offered for rent or lease by the public for transiting the navigable waters of a state park requires registration fees to be deposited into the state park's special fund. Okay.

DLNR, given your shortness of time, I'm going to stand. DLNR will stand on our.

Okay, thank. Thank you so much. Okay. Scotty Surf Company, Tara Hancock in opposition. And Scotty's Surf Company, Charles Reifenbach in opposition, Uilani Naipaul in support. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to HB 1316? And I believe I may have some questions on this measure. Dlnr. Okay, I think this measure is going to be.

Well, first off, you added several more of the. Or what do we call it? The. I wouldn't say equipment, but those that are using like sailboats and other areas in this measure. And the question that I have is the addition of all these other activities with. One second.

I think it had to do with the use of the definition. The definition? Yeah. A vessel, like all the vessels. Yes. So the question I had was the individual. Yeah, one second. Yeah, one second. This one isn't on mine. Okay. Okay.

The question I had is currently there's no permits if you want to use a paddle board, the tow boats, windsurfers. So all these. This particular area in section D, you know, includes but not limited to you.

So you have barges, boats, canoes, catamarans, charter boats, cruisers, ferry boats, fishing boats, flat boats, floating cabanas, houseboats, jet skis, kayaks, motor vehicles, motorboats, party boats, power boats, rafts, rowboats, sailboats, stalls or skulls, ships, stand up paddle boards, tow boats, tugs, wind surfers, or any similar buoyant devices. Permittable permitting of free flotation.

But you're requiring all these to pay a registration fee. And so is it only for that particular area that we talked about, but not all of the other areas in the state?

It's not do bar. It's only state park. So Ellen, if you want to clarify.

Yeah, so like now if I want to go paddleboard, why I got to go get a registration.

So Chair, Vice Chair Members, Alan Carpenter, State Parks. Yes, thank you, Alan. I do believe that this is simply just to clarify the definition of vessel. And chilling kayaks are one of those because originally it had watercraft. And so we were clarifying the definition of vessel. All of these would not necessarily for anything that was commercial. Yes.

Most of these are precluded from using this area just because of size and practicality. But it's. Our intent really is to is to manage the uses of vessels that are being rented off site and brought to the river. And that's not going to happen with a Scow or a barge or a speedboat. Right. Those would.

Those basically have to be more. They couldn't make it under the Wailua River Bridge. So I think that's just a. It's simply to show the definition of vessel.

Okay.

And tie it to the. To be consistent with. To be consistent. These. These are not really an issue for us. The issues are kayak use and the rental off site thereof. And those that bring them to the river, particularly, they're flooding the river on weekends when locals want to enjoy it. Okay.

This isn't our admin bill or bill, so I think it's been in response to community concerns about over use by kayaks.

Okay. But then again, because this measure was only in a designated area, Kekua, Wailua river and just in state parks.

Waters within state parks, which are the only places where people can conduct this activity.

Okay. But not. Doesn't go beyond. Doesn't go like to doar or anything else like that. Okay. All right.

I just wanted to. To make sure that. That we're kind of clear. Yes. No, that's a good question. Thank you. All right. Now, your reading on this was different from the measure where Kelakikua Bay was. Was a different designation. Right. In your testimony.

So. But we would like to bring Keal Kikua into and all of these areas under the same set of rules.

Okay, right. Okay. Because you do say that Kelekekua has a regulatory authority over the base waters, but separate from the others.

Good point. So the other two are inland waters, rivers, fresh water. So they're contained within the parks. Generally, we do not have jurisdiction over ocean waters. Kealakekua. And actually, as a strange technicality, we actually have Anauma Bay as well as the state underwater park, but we don't really manage it.

But so is. So should we just take Kikua Bay out of this bill?

No, I think we wanted to apply within Kikua because the bay itself was EO to state parks, which is a very unusual addition to parks. Yes, but it was. It was EO to state parks specifically for our ability to manage vessels therein.

So I think, Senator, that's really sort of our. Our framework is wherever we have management authority, state parks, we need the right regulations to manage that. Okay.

All right. Okay. A little clearer. Thank you. Okay, thanks. Thanks. Thanks for being here. Yes. Senator DeCorte.

Thank you. So is the goal to reduce the amount of vessels in this one particular area. So you're. It's.

Yes. Okay. And. And control their days of use. Right. So right now we have 18 permitted Kayak either guided or self guided companies in on Wailua River. They have rules. They can't operate on weekends or we want locals to have space. They have to. They can only land in certain places, are prohibited from others.

They have to follow a specific trail to a waterfall, but avoid adjacent archaeological complexes that are very sensitive, et cetera. These folks that we're trying to regulate, they come from the outside, are not subject to any of those regulations. They go wherever they want. They.

They don't have the education necessarily to know what's sensitive and what's not, etc.

Okay, great. And then for commercial and private use or just commercial use? Just commercial. Okay, great. Yeah. Hawaii Kai has a similar understanding in its marina, can operate on the weekends, those kinds of things. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, Chair.

Okay. All right. Thank you so much. All right. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to HB 1316? I think I called the rest of. Yeah, there were. There were two in support and two in opposition. All right, we'll move on to HB 1359. House draft one. And this is relating to flood mitigation.

It establishes a grant program for drainage system maintenance and flood mitigation measures in residential areas to be administered by DLNR appropriate funds. I don't know if DLNR would be happy with this measure. Nonetheless. DLNR.

Thank you very much, Chair and Vice Chair, Dawn Chang. For interest of time, I'm going to stand up our testimony. But that's what you notice. We only offered comments.

Yes, yes, yes. Okay. Is there anyone wishes to speak to HB 1359? And just Members, in looking at this measure and knowing the responsibilities of blnr, I have brave reservations about this measure. It's more fit to be under the county's jurisdiction. And yeah, this is. I think we personally. This should be under the county's written. So.

But just for discussion purposes and that, you know, anyone wishing to speak to HB 1359, going once, going twice, that's it for the hearing. And we will go into decision making under this measure. And let's see. Okay. We've had, I think, quite a few changes on my decision making, so I will go into it.

Let's go into recess, please.

Committee on Water and Land is going into decision making on its agenda of Friday, March 14th. We will proceed with the recommendations on HB 86, and this is relating to DLNR and the Makkai Watch. Chair's recommendation is to pass this measure as is. Okay. Any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair votes aye.

[Roll Calln

Thank you. On HB 306, and this is the water code penalties, the Chair's recommendation is to pass with the amendments recommended by CWRM as well, and let's see, there's no—we're defecting the date as well on this measure. Any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call]

Okay, thank you. Oh, let's see. Okay. HB 316, House Draft 1, the Green Jobs Youth Core. Chair's recommendation is to pass with the amendments. We'll just be defecting the date to July 1st, 3000. Okay. Any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Chair the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call]

HB 506 and this is the conservation enforcement on DOE care. This—the Chair recommends that we pass with the amendments, just defecting the effective date to July 1st, 3000. Any discussion? Seeing none. vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. HB 510 relating to declaration of the water shortage and emergencies. Chair's recommendation is to pass with the amendments presented from CWRM, also defecting the date to July 1st, 3000. Okay. Any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call]

Chairs—on HB 649, House Draft 1, and this is the small boat harbor special funds. Chair recommendation is that we'd be deferring this measure today. Okay.

HB 800, this is relating to government and our discussions on potential acquisition of the Ali'I Tower. Chair's recommendation that will pass, just to keep the measure alive for—continue communications—and move this measure forward for future discussions as well. We'll be making the amendments and just taking out anything related to Couple A. Okay.

And that's on page five and part four, lines 11 through 15. Okay. And we'll be defecting the date to if 7-1-3000. Okay. Any discussions?

Chair, I appreciate the amendments. However, I still have some reservations and some concerns, so I'll be voting aye with reservations.

Thank you.

Okay.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. HB 1137, House Draft 2.

Chair's recommendation that, with regards to the restoration of beach lands, we'll be incorporating the amendments from San Hi on page 3, paragraph 3, lines 1 to 2, to add the language provided that emergency erosion protection structures originally permitted by the Department that shall not be deemed abandoned and we'll defect the date to July 1st, 3000.

Any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes Aye.

[Roll Call]

HB 1141, House Draft 1, relating to updating of the public land leases issued pursuant to Chapter 171 of the HRS. Chair's recommendation is just to pass the amendments, defecting the date to July 1st, 2040. Okay. Any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call]

HB 1278, relating to hazardous tree removal. Let's see. Oh. Chair's recommendation is to defer this measure., and specifically, I think this is a county issue, not something that we're going to have DLNR or BLNR responsible. Moving on, HB 1348, relating to public lands.

Chair's recommendation on this measure is just to pass with amendments, just defecting the date to July 1st, 2040. Hearing—any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call]

Okay. On HB 1316, relating to the DLNR and the required rental vessels, Chair's recommendation on this measure is just to pass with technical and non-substantive amendments and also, defecting the date to July 1st, 2040. Any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call]

HB 1359, relating to flood mitigation. Chair's recommendation is just to defer this measure, and this certainly should be responsibility of the countess. Okay. This concludes the Water and Land hearing of March 14th. It's a local Friday. Have a nice weekend, folks. All right.

Thank you.