Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and Environment

Calling the Committee on Higher Education and Committee on Agriculture and the Environment to order. Today is Monday, March 17. Happy St. Patrick's Day. It is 1:05 p.m. we are in Conference Room 2 to 4 and we have two items on the agenda.

This meeting is being streamed live on YouTube and in the likely event that we have to abruptly end this hearing due to technical difficulties, the Committee will reconvene any outstanding business tomorrow in room 229 at 3 p.m. and a public notice will be posted on the Legislature's website.

First item on the agenda relating to the coconut rhinoceros beetle program. House Bill 643. House Draft 2. Establishes Short Term management initiatives for the coconut rhinoceros beetle response program and appropriate funds for the activities and positions related to the coconut rhinoceros beetle infestation control. First up to testify, we have Robert Hoff in support. Hi, Robert. Good afternoon.

Thank you, Robert. The Hawaii Department of Agriculture. Thank you. We have Parwindo.

Thank you. Chair so much. Chairs for the opportunity.

Thank you very much. We have Master Shelby Billionaire not present on Zoom. Chair not present on Zoom. Okay, anyone else? We have a number of written testimonies all in support. But anyone here wishing to testify in this message measure? Anyone on Zoom wishing to testify in this measure hearing? None. Members, any questions? Any questions?

Who would you like to ask?

Can I get the University of Hawaii?

Parvinda Grewal. Dean Sitar.

Thank you. In the bill it says we're working on permitting to bring in agents in hopes to host range studies in early 2026. I believe that's talking about the fungus. Is that right? Range studies for the fungus. Bring the fungus out.

I'm going to ask my colleague here to come over to answer that specific question.

Keith Weiser, the deputy and its commander of the Coconut Rhinoceros Beetle response that I don't remember which part you're referring to exactly, but it does sound like biocontrol. So that would either be the fungus or the virus Release.

And early 2026 range studies. Is that what we're on track for?

A lot of that hinges on a biocontrol facility that is approved for the testing for efficacy and safety. So if that's in place, I think we're assuming that that is going to happen, but that any delay in that would delay the whole process. But yeah, I think that sounds like a realistic timetable. Where is it now?

Who's testing that? There's initial testing is being allowed at University University of Hawaii in Mike Melzer's lab. But to do the Final testing. The regulatory bodies, which is primarily Hawaii Department of Agriculture, require a certain level of biosecurity. And there's not a facility on island with the capacity for CRB currently.

So they're looking at a mobile facilities short term and then long term, larger biocontrol facility, more permanent.

Can you sum that. Sorry, I was trying to process that. What is needed to make sure that maybe we can get out on the range on land, test outside earlier than early 2026.

Yeah. A bio secure facility that has space for coconut rhinoceros beetle to be in there with the biocontrol agents.

So a safe lab could be a. Yeah.

Biosafety level. A specific biosafety level of lab. Yes.

In the request we request, I believe it is. It's blank in the Bill, but in the Committee report, $200,000 for one technician, two grad students for biocontrol research. That number should be higher.

Then there's separate funding that. That the facility would be that the intent is to get that facility through other funding. And then the staffing is what's in this Bill. Some of the staffing is what's in this Bill.

Should we ask for it here too? In every place that we can. Sorry, Char, I know there's a lot of questions, but on our side, obviously the trees is almost gone.

Yeah. I think the only danger there is potentially double dipping if somebody's already willing to pay for it. And then you ask for it here, and then you've asked for that twice, you know, would be the only issue there.

But are we on track to getting, in your opinion, that lab that you need?

I haven't been as directly involved in those discussions. I think Mike Melzer and possibly Rob Hoff might be a better person.

Is that, uh, as well?

I think. No. I think DLNR has been involved in some of the talks for. For that funding, and HDOA has also been in talks for some. Some of that funding. So I'm probably not the best person.

Can we get Sharon Hurd? Director Hurd, can you come over? Thank you. Thanks.

Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the Committee. Sharon Hurd. Department of Agriculture, a part of Act 231, Senator, was $600,000 for the biocontrol facility planning. Right now we have awarded a contract to AECOM. They are looking at a piece of property in. We have the TMK in Wahiawa and they're doing the planning for that.

The remaining money, once we have the planning, is for the mobile facility because it's CRB and because it's a virus. You need a level three which contains the air. So it's not going to be a cheap facility.

We're looking at two different mobile units to be placed on the property and I'm sorry, I don't have a time for you. I know it's urgency is there, but yeah, you gave us $600,000 last year and it's been put to good use.

For a facility that's enough to get you what you want, what you need.

No, it's the planning side of it. It's about 400,000. We're using 150 right now total. 400,000 for the planning. And then when you actually buy the unit, we're looking at about maybe 2 million. A million each. So that when we retrofit it for what we need, we need to. So about 3 million total.

Where's the request for that? Is there a request for that until.

We get the planning and design done and we get a location and we're closer. BNF has a tendency not to approve money and expenditures until you have planning and purchase of the property. It's like a process with them and what they're asking us is get, get us a better number and then we'll talk.

So potentially we're waiting all of this session. It's not going to happen the next session. You guys would have to come back potentially to ask for the money. We need to get those.

Yeah, it's not going to happen for another year, but.

Yeah, but that's real far.

That's far away.

Is there any way we can do it faster? I know the researchers at uh, they got it. We got something that can work. Should I back all the way up? What's the one way we're going to control this? We can do the one way. The top way.

But maybe this.

Fun. New Zealand. New Zealand has the virus. They have the lead on the P virus. That is the P virus kills the crbp. It's very good at killing them all. Even after hurricane, both the CRB and the virus come back and they kill each other. Okay.

The G virus, which is what they're working on has shown promise on our crb, which is the gcrb. So they're working on it, but they need money to continue working because they don't have the G. We have the G. So if you want promise we can Fund New Zealand, but it's going to be millions.

Thank you.

Go ahead, Senator.

So Sharon, what? So all these years you guys said coconut, rhinoceros needles, so what? Nobody Came up with nothing yet.

We do have something, Senator, for landscape trees. They have systemic treatments for the landscape, but you can't eat the fruit.

Okay, so. So right now I noticed that you guys had Honolulu, right? You guys targeted Honolulu. Yes. So you're telling me $2 million but now you guys extending services to Maui, Molokai, Kauai and Lanai.

So included in the 2 million for the facility here, you're looking for another 2 million for facilities on those areas as well to do coconut rhinoceros beetle testing.

The mobile unit will do the testing and the, whatever the results are will service statewide.

But if the mobile unit is going through the testing, is it 2 million per mobile unit?

No, I believe I said 3 million for the total two, but that includes installation.

And so you're not putting mobile units on the other islands?

No, not at this time. You're going to send the specimens from the Maple Islands.

So what if you just send a specimen to New Zealand, then New Zealand has the specimen. Yeah, but if you can send a specimen from the neighbor islands to here, what's the difference with you sending this one over here to New Zealand?

No, I don't. Well, New Zealand is doing the testing and they found a strain that is effective. They think on the G virus, it clogs up their system and they die. In order to rear that virus in a safe environment, we need a mobile facility.

And they're willing to do it, but they need to, they need to have funding so they can, you know, make more and more. And more.

So if they treating it with the G virus, how much does the G virus cost us to treat it here?

We don't have enough G virus to do. We have to develop it and that's the cost.

So we would have to pay New Zealand to get the G virus to.

Treat it and to test it on the GCRB to see the efficacy. And once they have it then they can rear more and more and more G virus.

So you guys. So right now this Bill shows the funds contained will go to the University. Yes. So how much do you need to continue work on eradicating the coconut rhinoceros beetle?

That's a really open ended question. If I came up with tens of millions, it wouldn't be far from the truth. We have to just make small steps in developing different protocols. Yeah, we have enough. We have stuff for the landscape industry but as I said, it's not the landscape industry really that people are clamoring for.

It's for the food they want to be.

Okay, so if that's the case, then who picks and chooses? What is the priority? Is it landscaping or is it the food?

Well, they're both priority. We have to focus on the food now. We have to focus on killing the beetle because we have protocol for landscape. We don't have protocol for the fruits and vegetables.

I would think that the food would be priority versus the landscape.

I would agree with that. They're both not zero sum. We're working on both. We just have a treatment for the trees now. We don't have a treatment for the food, so we're attacking. Well, that's what I mean.

It's not like you're doing landscaping first and food later.

Because we have the treatment for the landscaping. We don't need to work on the landscaping anymore. We do the systemic injectors, you know, the crown and then the systemic treatments.

So does your budget now contain funds to help eradicate the coconut rhinoceros beetle?

Yes, but not enough.

No.

How much right now?

Last year, 231. You gave us 1.2.

And then one and then 600,000 for the biosecurity facility and I think 800,000 for green waste. So you really, you know, you're giving us funding for it? It's just taking time.

Okay.

And then what is your request this year?

Our request, 12.7 total, but that includes LFA and CRB was 1.2 again.

Okay, thank you. Thank you.

Chair, one more question. So the Senate version went over to the House in this measure? Yes, I think the House is being heard tomorrow. Okay. Was there a big difference in the two. No, no, no. Thank you.

Senator, can you give us an idea of how invasive it is as far as far as where it is? Is it all of Oahu? All of the neighbor islands, Oahu.

They've had detections on Hawaii island and Maui. All of Oahu. Pretty much all of Oahu. I'm sorry.

Yeah, I found one in Ilani. So I just wondered if it was in some communities.

Senator, they're about as common as cockroaches now.

Yeah. Yikes.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Any other questions, Members? Okay, if not, we'll have to move on to House Bill 736, House Draft 1 relating to wastewater systems. This establishes and appropriates funds for a three year new wastewater system and individual wastewater system technology testing pilot program within the University of Hawaii Water Resources Research Center.

And to testify, we have Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Anybody here from the department? We have Tao Zang testifying for University of Hawaii. Want to proceed?

Yeah. Dr. Yang can't make it today, but I'll be presenting, Ill be making the testimony. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair and Members, thanks for the opportunity. My name is Zhiyue Wang, assistant Professor at University of Hawaii with Water Resources Research Center. We stand on our written testimony, and I'm available for questions. Thank you for this opportunity to provide our testimony on establishing this new technology testing center with respect to cesspool replacement.

Okay, thank you very much. Number of people submitting in writing support for this measure. Ted Bohlen here? Ted?

Thank you. Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the committees, Ted Bohlen on behalf of the Hawaii Reef and Ocean Center. This Bill is about saving money for people who have to upgrade their cesspools.

As you are probably aware, we have a mandate of upgrading cesspools by 2050, and we have technologies now that are maybe not the best that are there. We need to investigate more. The University of Hawaii Water Resources Research center used to have a program to test technology when Roger Babcock was there.

This is about giving some money to restore that center. And if the University of Hawaii contests these wastewater treatment technologies, then the Department of Health can certify them. They can come into usage, and that would save a lot of money, perhaps.

So that's the hope, is that we're going to make cesspool upgrades cheaper because we all know they're pretty expensive. And this would do, hopefully do a better job and also maybe do a better job in removing the pollutants that really hurt the ocean and the reefs.

So I'm a strong supporter of this Bill and I hope the Committee will. Committees will approve it. I'm available for questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in this room wishing to testify on this measure? Anyone on Zoom wishing to testify? If not Members we're open for questions. Any questions? Questions? Senator Favella?

Yes, Senator.

Yeah. So the. The question I have and, you know, not nobody from, you know, maybe the city, not nobody here, nobody from the Department of Health still never come back to-

I understand you guys want to do this testing and you guys want to do this research, but how is that going to help the wastewater work that is going to be done on the west side of our community because they still can approve. You want to protect the water? We want to protect the water.

Still not a factor. My community cesspools is contaminating Clean Water Act and the ocean. So here we go again. We're going to do something like this, and then the best technology going forward or the city saying change the septic tanks tie into the sewer. That's not the solution for my community.

So I just like no, even if you guys gonna do this, where is the data? The data that I want to see is maybe stored on a website to find out if any of the places that I'm talking about in my community is actually causing harm to the reef and the ocean and fresh water.

Nobody has an answer yet.

I think there are answers out there, Senator. The Department of Health has been studying this for many years. I served on a cesspool conversion working group for four years. There was a lot of analysis done around the state and the state was divided up into priorities based on how much impact the cesspools would have on areas.

And they found that virtually all around the state that there's some impact of cesspools.

I understand you're saying that, but I'm not worrying about other areas because my community right now is against the cesspool conversion. And right now you guys are worrying about the cesspool. Why don't you guys worry about perhaps contaminating my community in the ocean, killing our reef, organisms, suffocating them.

The water is changing, the temperature changing and it's not because climate change, it's because of circulation. So you're telling me we're gonna do all this research and telling me it is, but there's no scientific data.

You see, you guys did one thing for the whole state, but it doesn't concern my community because we had them for a long time. There's no up and down, there's no water flow, nothing like that.

So we like no, because I asked that when I was on the board, when the city came, they didn't come back and tell us to this day that the Clean Water Act said where we are located in Ewa Beach there is no concern contaminating Clean Water Act.

But then you saying that you was on a task force but what areas did you guys really study? Closer to the ocean, 10 miles away from the ocean, where it was just a blanket testing and you guys decided that all of them is no good.

Because you guys assuming that it's contaminating the water and the ocean but there's no proof in fact that other other things are contaminating the ocean, that you guys are not being a factor to other elements. So that's just my thing because I, I kind of keep, we keep doing these testings and stuff like that.

But you guys already have it in you guys mind that all cesspools is no good septic tanks is no good tied to the sewer treatment plant that is dumping raw sewage into our ocean. Look at Kailua. They just had our Clean Water Act issue and dump water to Kailua.

I guess you know you got a solution better than that, right? I don't know.

There are certainly other pollutants that affect the ocean. We know that cesspool waste which goes down into the groundwater, the groundwater flows out to the ocean. There's lots of data tests around the state.

Send it to me because you said there's a lot of data but since I've been in this square building I see not one showing.

Please do that.

Can I get UH's Water Resource Research Center?

I don't know that they're here. Parwinder is the one, Parwinder is from UH but I don't know if this is area. Not your area? Anybody?

I just like to know. I mean I'll ask it to the General public, anybody listening? What types of technologies will this pilot project be looking into?

Well I'm with WRRC so I can help answer some of that I think. So these testing centers will be open to the public. So any companies with new technology are that's interested in getting certified in Hawaii can come and test it at the pilot site.

And the purpose again is to bring costs down for certification on new technologies because currently there's only septic tank, drain filled, ATUs are certified in Hawaii. So any new technology that are lower cost for decentralized systems and also that includes biofilters or any biogardens or any sort of photobioreactors.

These, these kind of technologies just, just an example can, can get tested.

Sorry, the. The last three technologies you, you stated bioreactors and two other.

Oh, photobioreactors.

What are those?

So most of these are passive treatment units that does not, for example it requires very minimum energy cost to run the system. So all of these are passive trickling through by gravity or powered by solar radiation.

Some of these technologies are available but they're not certified in Hawaii so they cannot be installed in any of the individual households. So these are just some examples.

Okay, you're talking about the systems, the wastewater systems. Would this cover over at the Ala Wai they do the Genki Ball Project and they've shown the testing of the microbes. It has gone down. And in Kahului we're going to run a pilot program after this session where we'll use that same technology in cesspools.

And it's supposed to be an organic way to reverse the damage that cesspools does on the surrounding environment. We'll test the waters. Would something like that be able to fall into this? I see that you guys are asking for $745,000 for this three year pilot program. We're over here trying to do it for free with donations.

If we could get some help. Our numbers say that for what you guys are asking, 750, we could treat 1500 homes for a whole year if we did the Genki solution.

I'm sorry, what is.

I'm just asking if that could be incorporated with that, with the, with the Genki, with those microbes, with that nonprofit, would that be able to fall under this?

Yeah, I'm not again, not very familiar with the technology but if that's the technology that wants to be tested in this at the center, we can definitely do that.

So the purpose of this is more to establish a platform so that we can test different new technologies for process for replacement and can do that a few of them at the same time to initiate this progress.

Lastly one more time.

So what I'm asking is if I got a cesspool, are the alternative technologies that you guys are going to be looking at right now going to limit me to having to change it out in any way rather than adding just liquid into my toilet that'll go clean my cesspool so all those bacterias are not going down the stream.

Is that an option or are the only options physically upgrading cesspool to something else? Can you treat cesspools organically? Would that fall on you?

I think that would fall on...

If not, then my vote is a no.

What is the purpose of this to? To look for all, all new technologies?

Yeah. So I think that's one possibility that we need to look into because I don't have enough evidence to support that- that statement that you're saying. But that would be we're open to test it out because I don't know about that yet.

So what would be the process for these entities to come forward? All they have to do is apply to have it tested. Do they have to do anything else?

So yes. So we're envisioning that they will pay a testing fee that covers their system set up. So we are trying to collaborate with city, County of Honolulu and testing establish a testing site at a wastewater treatment plant.

So from UH side we'll provide graduate students and admin support to, to run these testing platforms and these companies will set up their own system connected to a sewage pipeline so that there's constant feed to their whatever system they're testing and our goal is, our role will be to collect the samples and analyze it at UH, using our facility, research facilities here to provide a service to get, to collect the data, analyze it and generate a report to the Department of Health so that they can use this data to certify the new technology, any new technology.

And how much would that fee be for these companies or entities to come in to get their technology tested?

We don't have, we don't have an estimate yet. But these 700 will initiate such a platform so that we can cover the first few three. I think we promised two to three technologies testing run first to get this program started. So if this program is successful moving forward, we're hoping to the technology.

Any companies coming forward to test their technology will cover all the cost for the testing center moving forward.

But you just said that they would have to pay a fee.

Yeah. So the exact amount, I don't have an estimate on that yet.

Okay, well I hope the fee is not prohibitive from going forward. Do you folks anticipate having a lot of new technologies entities coming forward to take advantage?

Yes, as far as I know there are a few companies that are interested in testing it out, but there's no such platform available. So that's what we're going to establish.

Senator Gabbard,

So what criteria will you be using to determine whether the pilot program should become permanent?

So it comes down to the operational cost. For example, once we establish this site with this initial fund which we basically what we're asking is for example supporting graduate student for sampling, analysis and any affiliated research moving forward. And the company will cover their own cost for setting up any system that's going to be tested. Yeah.

So moving forward we're hoping to get these testing center support itself financially by these companies.

Members. Any other questions?

So what, what is the actual timeline? Because all the things that you're saying right now to me, they're going to put in the sewer line and convert my community by the time this thing is done. And seems like what you're saying when testing lab seems like this is going to be a long process.

It's not something that we're looking into, you know, getting stuff done for the communities that cannot afford right now.

What's the question?

The question is that, what is the timeline?

So for testing we're trying to have an equivalent for the national standards. So each testing period will be six months for any new technology, continuous operation. So taking into consideration like any setup or after analysis, each technology can be completed about nine months or so.

So we think that's why our estimate of for three years should be enough for at least three technologies moving forward. So, yeah, once we generate those reports, DOH will decide on whether these technologies are up to standard for treatment.

So you can only test one at a time, nine months each?

Yes, for now, that's what we're planning for. But for moving forward, if these platforms are set up, we can definitely have multiple ones running in parallel so that we can. Because these are just the same water parameters we're now analyzing.

Yeah, well, I hope you could run more than one at a time because the first one doesn't work, second one doesn't work. That's already almost two years, year and a half. And now another one.

Yeah, again, I mean these pilot testing will be accelerating such process because before we don't- I mean, as far as I know, for a few years none of the technologies are being tested right now.

Senator DeCoite.

So if the makers of the Genki Ball came up with an amount of what it would cost us to test, say it was, I don't know, 100,000 or 150,000, would you guys consider doing the testing?

Yes, if they come up to our testing center. Yes, we can definitely test it out.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions? Members hearing none. We're going to decision making. Okay, Members, the Chairs have concurred that House Bill 643 House Draft 2. This is the coconut rhinoceros beetle program that we passed this measurement as is. Do we need to defect the defective date? No. Okay, pass as is. Any discussion hearing None. Chair votes Aye.

This is Vice Chair for 643 with as is.

Pass. Unamended Chair both sides. Vice Chair, both sides. [Roll Call]

Same recommendations for AEN. Any discussion?

Chair votes act on House Bill 643 draft 2. Chair votes passing unamended. Chair votes Aye. Vice Chair votes Aye. [Roll Call] Five in favor. Motion.

Thank you. And for House Bill 736, House Draft 1 relating to wastewater system, recommendation is also to pass as is. And I'd like to add into the Committee report that these testings hopefully can go concurrently so that it's not just limited to one at a time. So with that, Members, any discussion?

Chair, you know, I would like to add into the Committee report that, you know, they consider using the Genki Ball as part of trying something organically.

I think what you're looking at is saving people a lot of money if it pans out well, I mean all these new technologies, are we just on a whims of trying to figure it out?

So I would think trying something that we've already used in the Alawai and saving people tons of money is something that we should consider and should be on priority actually.

Yes. And also any technology that has been tested and used somewhere else successfully that they would be prioritized. Yeah. To be tested.

Thank you.

Any others? If not. If not. Chair votes Aye. Pass unamended.

House Bill 736 to pass unamended. [Roll Call] Measures adopted. Madam Chair, thank you.

Same recommendation for any discussion Chair that's right.

No, I felt like Senator Favela as well. But I'll support this because of the discussion that we had and them saying that the Genki Ball would be able to apply and take a look at that. Thank you.

Okay, on the matter, House Bill 735 passing unametted. Of all five Members in attendance, is there anybody with boarding with reservations? What did I say?

773-6-736.

Apologies. 736 passing unamended. With all the Members present, is anybody voting with reservations or with a no vote hearing? None. All in favor? Motionless Adopted. Thank you Members.

Thank you. With that, the Joint Committee is.

Moving into our 1:01pm AEN only agenda. First up is SCR 111 SR 92 declaring a public health emergency relating to climate change and requesting statewide coordination to identify, plan for and create cross sector solutions to strengthen Hawaii's public health response to the climate crisis. First up is Department of Ag.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Cedric Gates, on behalf of the Department of Agriculture. Department stands on testimony in support of this measure. Here for any questions.

Thank you Cedric. Next is Henry Curtis for Life of the Land in support. Next is James McCallen for Hawaii Public Health Institute.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is James McCallen and I'm the Director of Community Preparedness and Resilience here on behalf of Hawaii Public Health Institute or HIPHI, in support of this resolution which declares a public health emergency in response to climate change.

When most people think of climate change, they think of sea level rise, eroding coastlines and maybe even talk about solar panels or electric cars. At HIPHI we also see how climate change undermines public health through increased wildfire risks, heat related illnesses, invasive mosquito disease and so much more.

I encourage you to please refer to the figure one pinwheel graphic on our written testimony detailing these health impacts of climate change. I also encourage you to please refer to a more detailed vulnerability assessment published on the Department of Health website on this issue. This cannot be a Department of Health issue alone.

Sustainable agriculture, urban planning that reduces heat islands, transportation and emergency response decisions. These are all areas of other state health departments that can either worsen or improve the health impacts of the climate crisis. By declaring a public health emergency and inviting cross sector collaboration, we can create a more coordinated, forward thinking response that prioritizes everyone's health.

This resolution sends a powerful message. It's about bringing agencies together to see the bigger health picture and to build stronger, more resilient communities. For these reasons, HIPHI respectfully encourages you to pass SCR111 SR92. Mahalo for your time and the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Next is Mehana Kapoi for Climate Change and Health Working Group on Zoom.

Aloha. Sorry, Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Senate Committee. My name is Mehana Kapoi. I'm a Native Hawaiian and a current undergraduate at the University of Hawaii. I am also a student intern for the Climate Change and Health Working Group.

I'm here to represent the Working Group's strong support for the proposed resolution calling for a public health emergency in regards to climate change. I come before you today representing the working group, but also representing the communities that this resolution will protect.

The essence of Hawaii lies in her people and it is her people that stand at the forefront of climate change, staring down the barrel of the threats that climate change has imposed and is protected to impose. This resolution is essential in shielding our communities, acknowledging their vulnerability to the potential impacts of climate change.

This recognition strengthens initiatives that will empower our communities to better withstand the challenges of climate change. Climate change puts Hawaii's people at risk for many health issues, for example, heat related illnesses, respiratory illnesses related to wildfires, degrading water quality, flooding and more.

As a native Hawaiian whose very being is woven into the fabric of these islands, the thought of having to leave these islands because of the health risks imposed by climate change is devastating. This resolution represents a lifeline, a desperate effort to preserve our ability to live safely on these islands in the midst of climate change.

This resolution is a crucial step in mobilizing initiatives and action toward the protection of Hawaii's people, sustaining the lifeline that will preserve their ability to live on these lands safely. This Legislature has previously recognized the seriousness of climate of the climate crisis.

But this resolution specifically highlights the risk it imposes on communities, urging every state agency to actively examine how their decisions affect human health. And in doing so, Hawaii can create thorough preventative strategies that reduce the incidence of climate related health impacts, protect the people that this Legislature intends to serve.

Mahalo Nui for the opportunity to testify in strong support of this measure. The climate crisis is a health crisis. This resolution is a lifeline for my people. Aloha.

Thank you Mehana. Next is Elizabeth Keifer in person.

Elizabeth Aloha Chair Vice Chair. My name is Dr. Elizabeth Keifer, I'm an internal medicine physician, I'm also on faculty at JABSOM here, also as a Member of the Climate Change and Health Working Group in strong support of this resolution. Just to remind everyone about the climate crisis being a public health emergency for us.

In our clinics, in the hospitals, we see elderly patients suffering from heat related illness because they didn't know that their diuretic medicine or the antihypertensive have made them more susceptible to heat. Heat related illness actually spiked this year during the Honolulu Marathon day. We're seeing drug resistant bacterial infections in the warm waters, warming waters of Pokai Bay.

We've seen in the past spikes of dengue here in Hawaii. And we know that our patients are worried about getting to routine Doctor's appointments or even life saving dialysis when Farrington highway, for example, floods. We heard these concerns out in Waianae in January.

The climate crisis is also ptsd, anxiety, depression, grief from the trauma of extreme weather events, wildfires or hurricanes. And that's happening now. But we're not helpless. Climate change is solvable. Science, innovation, indigenous Native Hawaiian knowledge can guide us forward if we choose to act. The resolution is more than just words on paper. It's a commitment to protecting lives.

And it means coordinating across sectors to build a system that can withstand the climate threats that we know are coming. In the end, this isn't just about rising sea levels. It's about the people that we care about. I thank you, and I urge you to pass the resolution to declare an emergency.

Because like in any medical emergency, delay can be deadly. Thank you.

Thank you, Elizabeth. Anyone else wishing to testify, either in person or online on SCR 111? 21 in support and 0 opposed. No comments. Members, any questions?

DoH. No DoH. Department of Health. Nothing?

No, Health is not here.

That's okay.

Thank you, Chair. Okay. All right. Moving on to the next measures. SCR115 and SR96 affirming the importance of marine ecosystem restoration to achieve the state's decarbonization goals. First up is David Sakota from DLNR. Thank you, David. Anyone else wishing to testify on these two measures? Okay, moving on to SCR139 and SR157.

Requesting the Department of Agriculture to designate Kunia, Kelehua Plateau and Pomoho as the Central Oahu Agricultural Corridor and to establish a list prioritizing for potential agricultural infrastructure improvement projects that would provide the most value to the state. Nicole? No, that's the other one. Anyone wishing to testify on this measure? Okay, therefore, no questions.

Next is SCR 164 and SR 133 requesting the Department of Agriculture to adopt rules authorizing rodeos on land zoned for agricultural use. First up is Nicole Galassi with the Hawaii Cattlemen's Council. Is not here in support. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? We had 13 in support, 0 opposed. Okay.

And then moving on to the last measure on the 101 agenda is SCR 183 and SR 1153 endorsing and reaffirming support for the progress achieved by the Aloa plus challenge through its integrated approach and six ambitious targets to be reached by 2030. Kara Oba, DLNR.

Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. I just wanted to at least strongly support this measure. State your name. I'm Kara Oba. And sorry about that. Carol from DLNR but yes, we support this resolution and we wanted to bring to attention that this having these goals that does hold us to accountability.

And we are currently up to 20%, 22% protected of our watershed forests. That was one of the natural resources goals to save 30% of our high priority watersheds by 2030. And having this visibility to these goals allows us to sort of, you know, communicate to the community as well as internally to have a measure of our progress.

And part of this that's important is increased funding and continuing that funding as we move forward to keep pace with this. Again, we are at 22% currently to only cover 30% of our highest priority watersheds.

So we encourage that we continue this, the Aloha Challenge to continue to support it and to continue to support these initiatives with funding. Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Cara. Anyone else wishing to testify on these measures? Sure. Yes.

Aloha Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members, Celeste Connors, with Hawaii Green Growth Local 2030 Hub. We want to strongly support this resolution. It is a demonstration of unprecedented leadership by Hawaii. It is attracting a lot of attention from other communities on how to also create locally and culturally appropriate models to achieve time bound and science based goals.

It's a real demonstration of alignment with public and private sector supported by business, community and government officials. So we strongly support this resolution. But I would like to see the floor to Kyari Kea, who's a Member of the SDG Youth Council and Kaamaloa Pathway.

Greetings, Senators. I'm Kiari Kea, 14 years old, native Hawaiian and a Member of the K' Omaloa Pathway and Hawaii SDG Youth Council.

The Aloha Plus Challenge really outlines the six social, economic and environmental goals that we need to reach the 2030 Agenda before the tipping point in which we'll reach catastrophic changes in climate that will not only affect me as a youth, but also my children, my grandchildren and future generations, their environment and the way that they can live their lives peacefully, safely and healthily.

These goals really outline how the local relevance of the Sustainable Development Goals as our own local version of these goals. And it echoes the indigenous wisdom and Hawaiian values that many people growing up in Hawaii learn from when they're a really young age. I've learned these values since kindergarten. Malama Kuleana Aloha Aina. Malama Aina.

I've learned about the Ahupua' a systems and I've brought these points to government officials, United Nations officials at the UN General Assembly and the Summit of the future.

And it is really Imperative that we take the time to work towards these goals and acknowledge these goals as Hawaiis solution to the world in terms of climate change and sustainability and providing regenerative solutions for the world. We're happy to answer any more questions.

Thank you very much. Anyone else? Members, any questions? Gerald has a question.

Come on back up. Anytime we get young people, I like. To talk to you guys.

You're referring to her obviously.

Yeah. Sorry, Celeste. So question you talked about protecting, define that for me. And where I'm going with this is that I get concerned that a lot of time people think protecting means don't touch it at all. And I would argue that stewardship is what we need to do.

The greatest threat in the rainforest, at least in the rainforest that I'm very familiar with, Koahala Mountain is ginger. And so respond to my comments on that, please. I want to hear your thoughts. Stewardship versus protection. How do those two get together? And don't get nervous here. Relax. You're amongst friends.

I am a strong believer in stewardship. As a native Hawaiian, we are very attuned with the aina. We believe in the reciprocal relationship between people on the aina. He ka' Ina hekaua Kekanaka. The land is the chief, the people it's servants.

I believe that it's very important that we're connected to the land and we know how to manage it, how to take care of it and how to properly work within it and make sure that we're providing for the land just as much as it provides for us with its food, its beautiful sights and everything that it can provide for us.

Thank you. You said the word. I was looking for management. So thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Okay, that's too easy. Underestimated.

Is it Hawaiian? I know, but I wasn't sure. Thank you.

All right. Thank you very much. It's okay, Committee, we'll move right into decision making. We'll start off with the first two—SCR 111 and SR 92, declaring a public health emergency related to climate change and requesting statewide coordination. Chair's recommendation be the pass as is. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, Members. SCR 115 and SR 96, affirming the importance of marine ecosystem restoration. Chair's recommendation will be to pass as is. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. Next is SCR 139 and SR 157, requesting the Department of AG to designate Kania etc, as a Central Oahu Ag corridor. Chair's recommendation will be to pass as is. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you very much. And then, moving on to SCR 164, SR 133, requesting the Department of Ag to adopt rules authorizing rodeos on land zone for Ag use. Chair's recommendation will be to pass with tech amendments. Any discussion? Sure. Yes.

Yeah. Quick discussion on this. Sure. This is a resolution I put forth. It's pretty simple. We embrace our paniolo heritage, but we don't allow it on some of our government lands, which makes no sense whatsoever. So, I'm putting this forth to see if we can get that done. Thank you, Chair.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, Members. And SCR 183 and SR 153, endorsing and reaffirming support for the...plus challenge. The chair's recommendation will be to pass as is. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Okay, thank you. And, and I'll gather up the 101.

Next up is our AEN deferred decision making from Friday, March 14th. The first up is HB 48, relating to coffee labeling, clarifying labeling and advertising requirements for coffee that is grown and processed in the state. Okay. On this one, the Chair's recommendation will be to pass with an amendment to defect the date to July 1st, 2050.

Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, Members. The next is S—excuse me, HB 782, HD 1—related to Ag establishing within the Department of Ag, a working group to review and make recommendations on amending or repealing unnecessary or obsolete laws pertaining to agriculture.

And the Chair's recommendation will be to pass with the amendments from the Wise Farmers Union to expand the scope of the review to include key agencies and an amendment also to defect the date to July 1st, 2050. And we'll also note in the Committee Report an appropriation request of $100,000 for consideration. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, Members. Next one is HB 980, HD 1, amending the law authorizing the killing of mongoose by clarifying the circumstances under which mongoose may be killed and off and authorizing feral chickens to be killed under certain circumstances.

Chair's recommendation on this one will be to go ahead and pass with an amendment to defect the date to July 1st, 2050. Any discussion?

I'll discuss it, Chair.

Yes.

What, what, what is the certain circumstances? I mean, I don't know about...one or two circumstances.

Yeah, that's—well, it's, it's pretty much in the, in the, the landowners, per, under the landowner's purview. Because you've got to have his permission, like written permission. Right? Yeah, so I.

Because, you know, I—sorry I wasn't here to, for the hearing, but that was my beating. What, what is the circumstances of?

Seems unnecessary. Seems—yeah. You know what?

You can do many.

The recommendation, my chair, I'm going to defer this indefinitely. I, I really don't see the need for it at this point.

Yeah, sure. I would concur with that. Okay.

Okay.

That's fine.

We'll defer that, this one, indefinitely.

So, your read is that that can be done now?

Yeah. HB 1237, moving on, relating to biosecurity. Appropriate funds to the Department of Ag for agriculture biosecurity and the prevention, detection, and control of invasive species in Maui County. And the Chair's recommendation will be to pass this with the defective date of July 1st, 2050. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, Members. SCR 88, SR 71, requesting Department of Ag to establish and administer a microbial algae soil products pilot program. Chair's recommendation on this will be to pass as is. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, Members. On SCR 91 and SR 74, urging the Legislature to advance legislation and support policies that safeguard individuals in the agricultural community, their families, their livestock, and other property and other individuals under their employment or care by amending the state's self-defense laws to deprioritize the duty to retreat, in certain circumstances.

The chair's recommendation would be to pass as is. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

One second, Chair. Trying to catch up.

Yep.

[Roll Call]

Okay. And moving on to SCR 93, SR 76, urging a Governor in the state to work towards a just climate future by integrating indigenous knowledge into policy and decision-making processes related to climate adaptation, climate mitigation, and climate resiliency.

Chair's recommendation will be to pass with tech amendments for clarity and including the mayor of each county in addition to the Governor and the state in the resolution. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you very much. SCR 94 and SR 77, Maui access to your control and venison initiative. The Chair's recommendation would be to pass with tech amendments. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. And finally, SCR 103 and SR 84, requesting the Governor to convene a temporary working day group to investigate the existence and environmental dangers of PFAS and other related chemicals. Chair's recommendation would be to pass with an amendment to clarify that the additional stakeholders shall be determined by the existing working group members. Any discussion? Chair votes aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you very much, Members. And that concludes 102.