Senate Standing Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts

Good afternoon. We're convening the Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts on our 3pm agenda here in State Capital Conference Room 224. We have a number of measures on our agenda this afternoon.

And we have an additional agenda with measures previously heard in this Committee that we'll be going to thereafter make sure if you would, to have written testimony submitted. We'll be asking folks to limit their testimony to no more than two minutes to make sure that we have enough time to let everybody have their voices heard. One minute.

Sorry, one minute. Because we're efficient like that. And with that let's dive right in. So first is House Bill 307 relating to special number plates. And testifying first on House Bill 307 is the Hardy Spore Foundation. zero, I'm sorry, let me go to folks who signed up to testify. Protect Kahoolawe Ohana.

Good afternoon. Aloha Chair. Josh Kakua, with the Protect Koalawi Ohana standing on our written testimony. And strong support and I'm available for questions. Thank you.

That's everyone who had signed up to testify in person. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure? If not, thank you everyone. Let's. Move on to the next measure then, which is House Bill 531 relating to special number plates. Also testifying first is the University of Hawaii. Good afternoon.

Aloha Chair. My name is Naoto Ueno. I'm the Director of University of Hawaii Cancer Center. I stand on my written testimony strongly to support HP531 which authorized special license plate recognizing the UH Cancer Center is supporting cancer research, patient care and community outreach.

Many people in our state is not aware that we have a NCI, National Cancer Institute designated cancer center right here in Hawaii and the Pacific which is dedicated to groundbreaking research and cutting edge treatment. More than 2,300 residents died by cancer.

The UH Cancer Center is in collaboration with our healthcare partner and which is I just mentioned, to stride in cancer prevention, early detection and treatment. So the UH cancer license plate is more than just really a funding source. It is a symbol of hope and commitment. We do recognize that this money will be very helpful.

But more than that we'd like to see that people know that University of Hawaii Cancer Center exists. So seeing these places-

Your time is up. Could you summarize please?

Okay, so seeing these plates on the road is very important. So we strongly support this Bill. Thank you.

Sorry folks, just per protocol because we're going to have a variety. Probably not on this Bill, but on Perhaps other bills, a variety of opinions. We just ask you not to celebrate, as it were, because there's always going to be somebody who has a differing opinion.

We don't want to hear that we're bullying or intimidating or anything like that. So up next on HB531 is the American Cancer Society. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair. I'm Cynthia Au. On behalf of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, or ACSCAN. We stand in strong support of this Bill? UH Cancer Center is the only National Cancer Institute designated cancer center in the Pacific and the top 4% of all cancer centers in the U.S.

Specialty plates would allow supporters of the cancer center to publicly do so and create additional funds to support the cancer center. In Hawaii, this year over 9,000 people will hear the words, you have cancer, but there will be less deaths because of institutions like the UH Cancer Center.

So we just hope that you can help the UH Cancer Center with this additional way of how to have supporters, public supporters.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next is Tiny Shah. That's everyone who had signed up to testify on House Bill 531. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure? If not, are there any questions? Okay, thank you, everybody.

Let's move on to the next measure, House Bill 54 relating to motor vehicles, which increases the penalty for a third or subsequent offense within five years of excessive speeding and other similar things. And testifying first is the Department of Transportation. Thank you. Up next is the Attorney General.

Good afternoon, Chair.

Members of the Committee. Deputy Attorney General Mark Tom for the Department. Department provides comments on HB 54 HD2. Specifically, we just point out three things in regards to fingerprinting. I think this bill tried to adjust fingerprinting for the third conviction.

However, the main concern is actually the first and second conviction, because that's actually used to ensure that the individual that was convicted for the first and second that now leads to this enhanced penalty is the exact same person that we're charging with this enhanced penalty.

So we did provide language for proper fingerprinting for the convictions of the first and second. And although, as I mentioned, although it seemed some proponents will say that it's evidence gathering, what it really is is to ensure that we're prosecuting the right person for this offense. Would also note the revocation to begin upon release from imprisonment.

And last. Last year, Act 212, which addressed third convictions for driving without license, did not. It's very similar to this type of bail. It did not have fingerprinting. We just provided language for possible fingerprinting for that charge as well. Thank you. Thank you.

Up next is the Office of the Public Defender. Good afternoon.

Hey, good afternoon. Chair Sonny Ganaden, Deputy Public Defender. The Office of Public Defender is in opposition to this bill. The bill that we passed that was similar to this regarding driving without a license has had significant ramifications for the district courts throughout the State of Hawaii.

There are already very significant penalties for individuals who have a third traffic violation similar to this. Currently moving through the Legislature are several bills which assist individuals with taking away the excess of punishment through expungement, community courts, these kinds of things. It seems like the Legislature is a bit schizophrenic this year. We're hoping.

Yeah, we're hoping that you could solve this problem about fingerprinting and identifying individuals without mandating the individuals serve the 30 days in jail which could really impact their lives. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next on HB54 is Honolulu Police Department online?

Not available on Zoom, Chair.

Okay, that's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 54? Seeing none. Are there any questions? Okay, let's move on then to House Bill 706 relating to highway safety, which requires skateboard users under the age of 16 to wear a helmet.

And testifying first on 706 is the Department of Transportation. Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify in this measure. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Tony Hawk 's not in the room? All right. Are there any questions? Seeing none. Thank you, everyone.

Let's move on to the next measure, House Bill 1231 relating to traffic safety, which deals with red light photo enforcement. And Testifying first on 1231 is the Department of Transportation. Thank you. Up next is the Judiciary. Comments? Oh, online? Yes. Thank you. Good afternoon.

Hi. Thank you. My name is Ro Kaing with the Judiciary. We submitted written testimony only. But to reiterate the concerns the Judiciary had was based on the volume of citations and the impact it would have on our understaffed district courts.

The, what the Judiciary is asking at this point is to allow adequate time to confer with the DOT and that the Legislature, Similar language to House Bill 235 that will be heard later in today's agenda.

Also to seek public input from the Committee in the selection of locations for the cameras, with a subsequent report provided to the Legislature by the DOT and with the Judiciary's input in the DOT's expansion plans overall.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

1231, up next is the Hawaii Appleseed Center for Law and Economic justice. Online. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. I'm Trinity with Hawaii Appleseed and we're testifying in support of HB 1231 and we also provide suggested amendments. Hawaii faces an urgent railway safety crisis. In 2024 alone, there were 102 traffic fatalities statewide, with 42% involving pedestrians and bicyclists.

Pedestrian deaths have increased by 26% in recent years, with nearly half of Oahu fatalities occurring on state off roads. We would like stronger measures to protect our most vulnerable, especially keiki traveling to school. The Safe Routes of School program plays a key role in this.

However, it is severely underfunded with states mandates to complete multimodal networks in five years. Greater investment is urgently needed. The Hawaii Climate Commission recently identified nearly $1 billion needed for these goals. However, the traffic violation is not sufficient to meet the state multimodal infrastructure needs.

While red light cameras have been shown to improve compliance, there is valid concerns like privacy, enforcement, fairness and due process. Mahalo for your time and consideration. I'm available for questions.

Thank you very much. Testifying next also online is Edgardo Diaz Vega.

Yes. Good afternoon. So, yes, I'm Edgardo Diaz Vega. I'm just a graduate student at UH and I'm testifying in favor of this Bill.

Since every day I walk around Honolulu and I've seen basically the way drivers behave and I've noticed that in intersections that do have at least red light enforcement, there tends to be greater compliance or at least drivers are more aware of, of their surroundings.

As Hawaii faces a you know, ever increasing amount of pedestrian and cyclist deaths, it's important to have this enforcement of drivers, you know, the compliance with laws. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify in HB 1231. Is there anyone else wishing to testify this afternoon? Please come forward.

Hi. Thank you. Chair, apologies for our testimony wasn't in. Mariah Yoshizu on behalf of Ulupono Initiative, we are in strong support of this Bill, particularly for the Safe Routes to School program. We appreciate this Committee's dedication and hard work to finding funding for this program.

Since there is such a large need across the state, any, any funding mechanism to support these types of projects would be a great benefit for our state. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Seeing none. Are there any questions? All right, if not, thank you everybody. Let's move on to the. Oh, actually real quick, DOT, sorry.

On 1231, although we have three kind of red lightish similar camera bills up on the agenda today, some of them deal with, I guess they all deal with funding to some degree.

But in general, for, I think the judiciary's concerns that were raised about just sheer volume, the funding currently available does not allow a massive overnight expansion, but rather would be reflected actually in the next Bill based on a slow rollout.

That's correct. That's correct. So right now we have 10 locations or 10 intersections that already have cameras on them that can be turned into speed to issue warnings immediately. And this 10 in October at the latest would be starting to issue citations. In order for us to expand to the next 10.

It's about 2 million bucks overall for equipment, resources and resources necessary for police, prosecutors and judiciary. And part of the rollout for the next 10 is to ensure that we start automating the judiciary. Right now, everything is manual. So any anytime we issue these automated citations, they go over to judiciary and get manually posted.

So make sure we reset that whole system and set them up to manage not just the 1500 red lights that they're getting, but the 40,000 speed camera citations that are going to be coming through as well.

While we manage that, we'll make sure that we start setting up the next 10 for next year and then the following year another 10.

So we'll expand the program that way systematically with the hopes of ensuring that we hit the intersections that the data suggests we should go to next based on volumes, crashes, crash history and conflicts with bicycles and pedestrians.

Thanks. And then real quick for the Judiciary. Are you still with us?

Yes, Chair. I was waiting for the video to start. Yeah, thank you.

Yeah. So with that kind of like slower burn rollout for stuff, do you guys have the ability to sort of absorb over time and kind of staff up, so to speak, I think as the hypothetical rollout would suggest?

The initial startup is what our current hurdle would be. So as you see in the written testimony that was submitted, everything is manual at this point. We received the paper citation and input this.

Our systems are not linked to other agencies to receive a digital copy with all of the identifiers such as name, age, birth date, readily input into our system and read bar system. At the very least, once we got to that point, we would need staff to review for accuracy. It is very much a concept at this point.

And then real quick follow up for DOT, just to that point, hypothetically, you guys have the authority to, in implementing the program, provide for citations at different levels of speed violation I guess you could say, at least for the speed cams?

Yeah.

But if it's to their point, sort of phased in and limited, do you guys have the ability to like start higher so there's hypothetically fewer and then kind of scale in if there's a need that arises?

That's correct. And to the Judiciary's concern, our vendor has already built out a system that automates this type of operation with other jurisdictions that we can share with them that we can implement pretty quickly.

Okay, well, thank you, Senator Elephante.

Yes, thank you, Chair. So currently now the signs for the red lights, speed cameras are just as photo enforced. Does DOT need to change that or does the photo enforce encompass speeding?

The photo enforce encompasses speed right now. But we can, I mean, we want to be as transparent as possible. Want to make sure that when people, when we put out these types of technologies, everybody understands where it's going to be. If you turn on your Google Maps, it'll tell you that a red light camera is coming up.

But we're going to make sure that everybody sees it. We'll put on educational information so everybody understands where we're going to be instrumenting at. So after that, if you run, run that red light or speed through that intersection, it's all on you.

Thank you, Director. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Any further questions?

All right. If not, thank you, everyone. Let's move on to the next measure, HB 1166, related to the Automated Speed Enforcement Systems Program, which is just funding an appropriation for this purpose. Testifying first on 1166 is the Department of Transportation.

Thank you, Chair. We submitted testimony, but I left out two amendments that I'd like to add into the testimony itself. The first is to make sure that we change the moving violation that we inadvertently put in last year to a non-moving violation.

So, we put in language that pretty much says that some incitations and resulting convictions shall not be recorded on a person's traffic abstract or used for motor vehicle insurance purposes—that turns it into a non-moving violation.

The second piece of it is we'd like this statute governed by 291C108 that gives us the provisions that are necessary to run the program, just like the red light program, instead of 291L5. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Up next on HB 1166 is the Judiciary. Good afternoon, again.

Thank you, Chair. So, similar to the previous House Bill for 1231, it is still the district court statewide that will be impacted. What the judiciary is asking for is adequate time consultation with the DOT, seeking a public input as well for the exact locations reports to the Legislature, consideration of the Judiciary's input to these reports as well.

It is the same staff. It is the same staffing issues that are felt statewide. So, there is no opinion on the Bill itself, just a request for time to make these transitions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That's everyone who signed up to testify on HB 1166. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Seeing none. Other questions? Just one follow up real quick, for fines, let's assume that the program's moving ahead and implemented, where do fines—where are they currently scheduled to go? So, I guess.

Based on the Bill that was passed last year, the fines go into that red light or photo enforcement program. And then does any part of that other than actually with the vendor help the Judiciary? Yes.

So, the funding that goes into that pot allows us to use it to enhance the program, not only for resources for the Judiciary, but automating their systems as well.

Well, okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Any further questions? Seeing none. All right, thank you. Let's move on to our next measure, House Bill 235 relating to traffic safety, which is photo red light imaging systems on the North Shore. And Testifying first on 235 is the Department of Transportation. Thank you. Next is the judiciary.

Thank you, Chair. This bill affects mostly the North Shore of Oahu with now the Traffic Violations Bureau. That section of the judiciary being affected by district court like the previous two bills. Again, what the judiciary would be asking for is very similar.

Apple time to collaborate with the DOT in this expansion with a effective date humbly requesting January 1, 2027. The process for these citations are although received by Oahu electronically. As I stated before, court staff need to eyeball each entry to make sure that these are accurate and processed accordingly.

With that, I further renew our request for time, consultation and input from the.thank you.

Testifying next on 235 is Mr. Diaz Vega online. Good afternoon. Hello. Yes.

So as I submitted in written testimony, I'm also in favor of this bill. It's really important to ensure that traffic laws are enforced across Oahu on the North Shore. We keep seeing that there's more accidents. And so it's important to have that enforcement.

But we also don't necessarily have the police officers or that type of physical resource to ensure that. So these cameras would allow for that enforcement, which would then help us reduce these deaths by having drivers comply. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everyone who signed up to testify on HB 235. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Are there any questions? Okay, next. House Bill 1164, relating to highway revenue bonds, which restores the revenue bond authorization for DOT under certain circumstances. And testifying first is DOT.

Chair, stand in support.

Thank you.

That's everyone who signed up to testify. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Are there any questions? Seeing none. Okay, thank you. Let's move on to HB 1159, relating to commercial harbors, which requires persons in charge of vessels to follow orders by harbor masters under an evacuation. And testifying first on 115—excuse me, 1159—is the Department of Transportation.

Thank you, Chair. We stand in support.

Thank you. Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, online.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Committee. Sorry, I was waiting for the video to turn on. This is Amber Ramirez with Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, standing on written testimony in support of HB 1159. I'll stand by for any questions or comments.

Thank you.

I have questions for her.

Yeah, hold on just a Sec. Come back. We also have, online, Eric Kingma from the Hawaii Longline Association.

Not available on Zoom, Chair.

Okay, that's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure this afternoon?

You didn't have Matson?

Seeing none.

We have comments, but they didn't sign up.

They didn't sign up, but there's recommendation. Interesting. Okay, I need...

Yes.

Yes. Yeah. Thanks for bearing with us. So, with your support of this measure, actually, it changes the instructions of emergency movement during emergencies. The Coast Guard already has that jurisdiction, so, and here we're saying it's the harbor master. So, are you circumventing the federal responsibilities as well?

So, ma'am, the Bill ensures a coordinated, swift response to protect lives, safeguard property, and minimize damage in our harbors during times of crisis. Having an enforceable evacuation mechanism will greatly improve the state's ability to respond to emergencies and avoid chaos in commercial harbor zones.

To the extent beyond that, written outside of what's our written testimony, I couldn't expand.

Okay, so you're not familiar with the duties and responsibilities of the Coast Guard?

Myself personally, ma'am, no.

Okay, then, DOT. Okay. And reason I'm mentioning this, because I was involved here during the last scare we had at the airport—I mean at the harbors—it was chaos. But this measure only has to do with the commercial side.

And reason I bring this up is because I think they wanted to evacuate everyone, including the fishing boats and including the smaller boats, and it created chaos is because if an emergency is not expected and some of those smaller vessels may not be able—or would not have been able—to equip their vessels with the fuel that they needed.

And so, it was a chaos because the owners of the vessel says we can't go out because we're going to be limited to the distance they can travel.

And another issue was, I understand, because it depends on when the emergency, or let's say a hurricane comes in, and it depends to what distance they're coming from, or whether it's coming from the east or west or wherever, that at times when they need to relocate on the smaller vessels, they couldn't.

There's nowhere for them to travel the distance. And so, are we saying that your harbor master would say that all vessels are to leave the harbor, or are we concentrating only on the commercial, as this measure says? So, when we're talking about the commercial side, we're talking about—and now you separate it.

Right? Because...they're on—what do you call, the sand island side. And I believe young brothers, though, is still in port on the other end. So, who is affected?

This is everybody.

So, it's everybody.

Everybody in the commercial harbor.

So, includes the smaller boats as well.

Let me clarify. So, this is following the Coast Guard's Captain of Port's order. The situation that you had yet indicated with storms, that was not expected. We've not seen a situation where the Coast Guard ordered everybody out without notice. We've always seen situations where there was 24 to 48 hours that we could consider preparing before.

There are some captains that don't prepare. The difficulty is when they don't prepare, if their boats are damaged within our harbor and block the cargo, especially during the situation when we know we're going to need those aid coming in, it puts everybody at risk.

So, the whole intent of this Bill is to ensure the Captain of Port gives an order. Our harbor masters will, will relay that order to everybody out there. This gives the authority to the state side, not to the federal side, because they already have that authority.

In the past, the Coast Guard had given an order and people have not.

We're not weeding out the Coast Guard?

No, not at all. We, we follow their orders. The Captain of the Port is the one that gives the orders. But this gives the authority to the, to the harbor masters who are on the state side.

When those harbor masters give that order, in the past, they've not been followed, and there's really no enforcement that we could put on the state side. That's what the Bill is trying to address here.

Okay. There were issues that came upon. When you're saying everybody else has to move and has to move out. Point of clarity was because of the distances, again, there are no other harbors such as Maui or Big Island or going to Kauai that would allow them, because those harbors or the small boat harbors has not.

They can't because all of their, their moorings are all pretty much allocated. So, what do we do with those that—do they just float around out on sea or whatever?

Yeah. So, the intent is for them to go out to sea and, and they should be, they should be managing their fuel or preparing themselves in order to be able to get out there far enough. And we can still work with the small boat harbors to make sure that there's sufficient space for them.

But I, I'm not sure if you're gonna get it.

Well, well, that's what we got to work towards. Again, it's either that or put our cargo at risk. And I think the latter is very difficult for me to consider, especially understanding during emergency situations, we need as much cargo in as possible.

Understand that issue as well. So, what are we going—oh, when is the effect of this measure? Is it upon approval or you're going to defect the date? I would say as a suggestion, can we see that the implementation?

After you folks communicate with all the users, wherever, whatever islands of the plans that you have going forward and implementation date would—I can feel comfortable that you guys have communicated with all the fisheries.

So, we've, we've been communicating throughout. I mean the difficulty is the harbor's users' group is made up of a bunch of different users and only one group of it is, is against this Bill. Everybody else is supporting it because they, everybody understands how important harbors are for our history.

Some of the small borders are not members of HUGs. So, that's a—fishing more on the fishery side is, is the concern, you know, but so, can you look into delaying the implementation, unless you can prove to us we're comfortable that all is good?

See, I have a hard time delaying only because this is an order given by the captain of the board. The Coast Guard has the official authority of it. Right now, we're just trying to make sure that the state side can enforce what the feds are already requiring.

And that requirement is all because we want to make sure that we protect the cargo shipping lanes. It's difficult for me to say that we can delay it and potentially have an issue.

Yeah. As long as there's communication going to all borders, whether they're the bigger guys and the little guys. Now, back to one thing that was brought up during that period as well. Did the University of Hawaii move out their boat that has been sitting there near closer to Nikos that—it's under the University?

Yeah, I'm not sure.

At that time, I think my suggestion to Lasner was if that boat is no longer in use, why you are taking up space?

You talking about that buoy thing, that energy thing?

No, I don't know what it is but it's been sitting there, and it doesn't go up and according to the space allocated to others that could use that for mooring has been a problem, but just check and later on, you know let us know. Let the let Chair know.

Okay, thanks.

Okay. All right.

Further questions?

Oh, excuse me now. Matson did send communication they are not here but let me ask you, they recommend part of it is on the size of the tonnage that—make an amendment and say it's under 200 gross tons.

For me, if. If the captain. If the captain of the port says it's. Everybody goes, yeah, if what? If they issue a condition that requires everybody to leave or not come in, then we got to follow that.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you. If there's no further questions on that one, then let's move on to. The. Last measure on our 3 p.m. agenda, HB1007, relating to the Hawaii Community Development Authority, which authorizes HCDA to cooperate with or assist public and private sector entities to engage in other projects, and establishes the Transit Oriented Development Infrastructure Improvement Program.

And testifying first is the Department of. Oh, I'm sorry. HCDA. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair and Members of. Craig Nakamoto, Executive Director. So this bill is very important to us. It's critical to the future of our agency. There's two parts to it.

One is a housekeeping measure that really tries to revise the findings and purposes to really reflect the current additional tasks that the Legislature has given us and also to reflect additional tasks that our board has asked us to do, like assist other state agencies, help other state agencies with their projects.

The second part of the bill amends 206e part 10. Instead of having four county boards like it was originally designed to have, we're proposing to eliminate the four county boards, create a program in this, and then have this program report up to the 17 Member General Authority Board for efficiency and eliminate redundancy in those boards. Thank you.

Members of Committee available for questions.

I have a question. Only a comment. Hold on one second. Let's get through that.

Okay, testifiers real quick. Up next is Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. Thank you. Next is Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Chair, as well as Members of the Committee, Kali Watson for the Department of Hawaiian Homeland. We're strongly in favor of this particular bill in a sense that it would benefit us.

Right now in Kapolei, we have the next to our Kalai' Ola development, or, excuse me, the Kapolei development, which we're going to put in about 700 new homesteads, as well as two other parcels that are looking to develop.

There's a missing Tod station that would extend to our Kamakana Ali' I development, which would really, you know, we have a hotel, we have a shopping center, we have park stores and everything there, as well as three different homestead communities. So with extension, possibly through this Bill, really enhanced our particular program.

So we're very in support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify on HB1007. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Seeing that in other questions?

Vice Chair Yeah. Well, this should have come to Waterland. It's under my purview and I don't know why it came to TCA, but just to let you know, I'll try to see if we can get onto the wems, the Next Committee because HCDA is under DBEDT and the purview is with dealing with Waterland as well.

And so we'll see if we can get on to them for the next Committee. And we're also responsible for TODs as well. Okay, just to let you know. So sorry about questions for anybody.

No.

Real quick, HCD, thanks very much. You had mentioned two different parts of the bill. One which deals with the board composition situation, the other one which just expands more broadly. Were there like specific areas or specific others outside of the obvious sort of urban core that you guys were looking at?

Not specifically Chair, but really more generally to be able to use our expertise experience in developing infrastructure to help other state agencies with their needs for infrastructure and other things and then just in other communities as well. And then the second part for the TOD, right now we have five community development boards.

With the addition of these four county boards that were contemplated on the original bill to create that TOD district under tool 6E, part 10 would have end up having nine boards and it's just administratively unwieldy and it's very kind of redundant to have that many boards for this administratively.

We can have anything that needs oversight over this TOD infrastructure development program go to the 17 Member General Authority Board for efficiency. It's a big board, but still better than having nine boards in a way.

Yeah. And then following up on that part of sort of a long term rollout for not just TOD, but just community infrastructure and stuff all around requires financing for you guys. What financing vehicles, I guess, or tools do you have currently available?

So under our General powers we can create district wide, you know, improvement programs. Sort of like what we've done in Kakako in some respect like improvement district. Improvement district, you know, programs that assess certain landowners. In the under the TOD section we have a kind of a user fee assessment.

I suppose if one were to consider different funding mechanisms to fund infrastructure, maybe a community, you know, facilities district or financing district or TIF, you know, having the at least the power to do it might be helpful in the future to Fund infrastructure development.

I think part of the reason for. This. At least as I read it, is Obviously to look ahead and put in infrastructure where it's needed so that other stuff can be done. And I think to the Chair's point, there's obviously multiple jurisdictions this touches on and all of that.

But in particular for transit infrastructure, for the stuff that you kind of the bones of what you need in a community to be able to get around and kind of develop upon and build community upon, getting that in place early is probably pretty key generally. And I think we've talked about this a few times.

But in Kakaoko, if we go back and do it over again from the beginning, it's probably more we could do at the front end, assuming that the resources and everything else are there. So if there's going to be future stuff, I don't know if it's with DHHL or you know, wherever.

Can you guys use those tools, financing tools to go in and partner with, whether it's the state, you know, DOT or city transit agencies or others to make sure all that stuff is in there from the beginning so that as we sort of build out and you have other projects come up, everything's kind of set and ready to go.

We're not doing it after the fact.

Yeah. And I think especially with respect to, you know, CFDs or TIFs, we'd have to partner with the counties in some, in some of those, I think. Chair Lee, I mean, you know, in a district like Kakako, the state on the front end put in a lot of money funds to develop the infrastructure in Kakako.

They've done a lot. But the other part of Kakako's development was what was contemplated was that private developers, you know, like Howard Hughes, like Kamehameha Schools, we're also going to, as part of their developments, put in open space, in the case of Howard Hughes, put in parks and other kinds of big other kinds of improvements.

So it's both, I think it's we stay putting in money master planning, which is important to master plan what is needed, set out a framework for development, how is it going to be funded? That's the second part. And then figure out how we're going to Fund all those improvement infrastructure improvements.

And to a great extent in Kakaako we've done that with master plans and figuring out what is it going to cost and then what is the method of financing. So hope I've answered your question.

Yeah, yeah, no, I raised that. I mean obviously I think folks tend to look at things like Queen street, which is not obviously your guys direct jurisdiction and it's Gone through a lot of iterations over the years, but. In. Many spaces it's still quite dangerous and unfinished, I guess you could say.

So I think where I'm going with this is if we have the tools, the financial tools to, and some of the partners on board early, can we then use those tools to be able to make sure that those kinds of things are kind of figured out at the front end rather than the, the back end once people are already living there and you get kind of dangerous situations?

Sure. I think that's actually HCJ's to plan, plan first and then, and then build. So yes, I think the short answer is yes. Charlie.

Yeah, so we added in like some sort of community financing district mechanism. Is that something you guys can make use of?

I think you already have that authority.

We, we have Vice Chair Norway, we have some of it. We have, you know, like we have a district wide improvement program, as I mentioned. So. But to answer your question, Chair, I think having the power is good to have the power to do it. But with financing districts with tif, they all have to be underwritten, right.

For the bonds. So question is, are they underwritable, so to speak, and can we do it based on the improvements and what needs to be done? Because somebody is going to be, going to be, might be responsible for the debt coverage, debt service for those bonds.

So the answer is yes, having the power might be helpful, but then to actually use it, we're going to have to look at it on a case by case basis and then probably work with BNF or somebody to make sure that it can be underwritten.

Just to add further though, with that proposal and working with bnf, they probably will say then you guys responsible for the debt service. That's, that's sticking point, right?

It is, it is.

You'll inherit the debt service.

It is. And that's always going to be an issue. I mean, if we're going to have to cover the debt, then that means there has to be enough revenues to cover the debt for debt service. So having the power is one thing, but then being able to use it is another.

And then being able to service the dead is another. If I understand how this is going to work.

Just one short question. You know, Kakaako, there are some areas that you already were part of the development, but on the lower side, as probably envisioned, you would probably make use of a development area that's open space, like where Jepson is, open lands under your jurisdiction, as well as making improvements.

So your area, when you develop and you have to build the infrastructure. And as an example, you'll have to build a roadway. Do you dedicate that particular road to the county or it's under you folks?

So, you know, if HCDA is going to develop a road in our district, you know, we're actually, you know, in the process of planning and designing for one of the roads in Kakao, a.

Shorter one like, you know, like Queen street, if you want the jurisdiction of Queen Street.

So, yeah, Queen street is another example, but we're working on one Ilani Wise street in Kakako, which is a stretch of street between Cook Cook and Ward Avenue. So we're planning that.

The intent is always to dedicate the improvements to the county because we just don't have the funds and the resources to, you know, manage or maintain those streets. So that is always the intent.

So they'll just tell you you got to build it to their standards.

Yeah. I think, for example, in Central Kakaako there are places where it could use more improvements. At this point, can we get the funding for it? I'm not sure for areas like in Central Kakaok and Queen Street.

Senator, thank you.

Chair Director Nakamoto has the HCDA board or the TLD Improvement District Board take a position on removing their authority.

So, okay, so for the TLD infrastructure districts, which is in 206e part 10, when the law was originally put into place, I think it was in the legislative session of 2022, Senator Inoue was involved with that. But I think it's at the same time that Pulahinui was created as a district.

So we created those four county boards because we wanted to kind of emulate how the other HCDA community boards were set up. Exactly. But we didn't create it to quite exactly like that, but they were community driven boards. So by doing, by this administrative change that we're asking for, it actually puts the.

It doesn't take away any authority from the HCDA boards. It actually puts it more squarely and cleanly under the General authority board of hca.

Yeah. Which. But now you won't have a district board.

Four county boards. Yeah, four county boards. Yeah, yeah. And. And up to now, even though it's been, you know, two years since the creation of that, we haven't been able to really constitute. Not constitute, but we haven't had any community Members suggested, you know, to sit on those boards.

And then I think for the other part of the Bill, which is the assistance part, I think the HCA board is in full support of the Agency helping other state agencies and using expertise.

Rather than the TLD Improvement District board making a recommendation and folding that into a program which will have recommendations from you and your staff to the full ACDA board to basically help out with efficiency.

Correct.

And that the oversight body will be instead of the four county board structure which was never really put together, It'll be the 17 Member General Authority Board, which is okay because for example, that's how the 99 year leasehold, you know, pilot program is administered is as a program and it's overseen by the 17 Member General Authority Board.

I think overall it's more efficient this way and it eliminates a lot of redundancy.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Further questions. Just following up on one of those points for other areas where now you're not going to have, I guess the county boards doing their thing also where you don't establish a defined district. Can you guys still go into a community and do stuff?

Yeah, because I think 206E part 10, while it goes from like this district, program district to a program, it still retains the basic definition of a TOD zone, like half mile radius from a transit station or other things. So yes, I think we still have that authority.

And then for if we were to add in like a CFD or other similar kinds of mechanisms, can you then hypothetically use those to. Or do you need to establish a.

Well, traditionally I guess, because obviously this isn't written yet, but traditionally would you need to establish a district and then implement one of those mechanisms for whatever purpose?

Yeah, I think I'd have to look into it a little more, Chair Lee But I think we would probably implement some kind of district. I'd have to take this up to the board for approval and then go through all the process of underwriting as well.

Yeah.

And then finally, as we think about sort of the next couple decades of urban Honolulu and obviously rails eventually coming through in the near future, there's going to be a lot of potential units, a lot of potential density and ultimately like community built in places like Ivala where there's not the same kind of thing right now.

And I don't want to speak for those communities because everyone's got their own culture and neighborhood and everything. But generally it seems like where things are going in that direction, there's going to be a need to do a lot more infrastructure, a lot more transit and mobility.

Certainly as rail comes through the area, trying to tie that into everything else. Would you guys see a role for yourselves trying to sort of help coordinate that sort of thing in a similar way to Kakaak or I guess maybe something slightly different or. Yeah, what would that look like?

Yeah. So on a project by project basis, we're already doing work in Iwo Lake Kapalama through the Tod Infrastructure District 260 Part 10. We're already doing some work in Iwo Lake Kapalama.

Second I think if we wanted to create like a CFD for Ivoli Kapalama, if those suggestions that you're talking about come to pass, we could create maybe a CFD or something in that district.

As far as us planning for the greater Ivoli Kapalama like we did in Kakaako, it's certainly something within our wheelhouse that you know, we could do and maybe that's what Ivoli Kapalama needs to kind of bring together, you know, bring us, bring us there to kind of plan for it.

What I don't, I'm careful about doing in Ivole Kapalama I think is the city is already is doing a lot of work in Ivoli Kapalama and there's a lot of interest in the city in doing some projects.

So I want to be careful if we given that role that I don't step on the city and want to work in collaboration with the city because yeah, we have to work together. It's big enough where I think it requires a lot of different agencies working together.

And then lastly if we want to go in, presuming that's the case and that's kind of the General direction for things and everybody wants to kind of play in the sandbox and kind of do their thing collaboratively.

We want to go in and put an infrastructure on the front end for some of the stuff we talked about like transit, other mobility, whatever else that is in partnership with either DOT or the city or whatever as well as the community. Many side similar conversations we had in the past.

We want to put in whatever like parks, libraries, whatever else you might might want in a community.

If there was a, an arm of HCDA so to speak that had that as a primary mission where we can just go in and Fund in not just using the financial tools that you have, like you know, some bond financed or CFD or whatever it is, but rather like if, if the legislators for the area said, you know, we, we have our CFP projects, this is prior for the community.

We want to get in and sort of slot it into this broader framework having sort of a.

I don't know what to call it, like an arm of the agency that can go in and just focus on that stuff as the primary mission so it doesn't get either lost in the shuffle or to some extent watered down in sort of the negotiation between all the different moving pieces.

Would you be able to would that work for you guys?

So, Chair, what it sounds like you're asking is whether or not when you say an ARM of hcda, it almost sounds like in the corporate world, kind of like a subsidiary or an affiliated entity with hcda. Here's my thoughts, just off the cuff about it.

You know, rather than make government bigger that way and also add to the structure of hcda, maybe what I might prefer is having a way to that we can just roll some of that into HCDA to the extent that the arm you're thinking about has functions and a mission that's similar to HCDA.

So rather than creating an arm, rather than making government bigger, maybe we just try to roll that all into HCDA as part of its mission in some way. Would be my off the cuff sort of thinking about it.

Chair yeah, no, all I'm getting at is I think when we think of the urban future of the city and other communities and whatnot, making sure that we have like the right elements that make community community, not just we got a bunch of units and a tower over here and you know, a parking lot over here, but rather all the other stuff that makes cities livable, public space, the whatever it is, park space or different transit pieces and community based economic development.

All that stuff that I won't speak for anybody else, but I'll say for me, I think just in our collective between city, state, federal and all the different agencies involved, stuff that kind of tends to fall through the cracks until you get to a point where everybody moves in and then there's just like frustration and it's kind of difficult to stick in after the fact and probably more costly or just not possible.

Yeah, I think I just go back. Chair, to you know, planning for all of that and saying, you know, what does this community need up front?

Planning for it infrastructure, what parks is needed and then planning for it and then deciding what the cost of that is and then how we're going to how all of that is going to be financed, maybe would tend to make things not fall within the cracks or have gaps.

But all the things about building a community, those are things that HCDA was really established to do. Not just the high rises or facilitate high rise development, but build a community.

Remember I was an intern there back in the day? All right, okay, that's enough for me. Are there any other questions on this measure? If not, thank you very much. Thank you, Chair. HB 1007 is the last measure on our 3:00 p.m. agenda. I'll remind folks, we have one more 3:02 p.m. agenda for decision making.

These were measures that were previously heard. So maybe what we'll do is go into decision making, our 3 p.m. and then go into our 3:02 p.m. if that works for you guys. And give us just a minute to get our vote sheets together.

So we're going to take a quick recess.

Good afternoon. We're reconvening the Committee on Transportation here in Conference Room 2 to 4 on our 3 o' clock and 3:02pm agendas. Thanks for everybody's patience. We had a couple votes next door that needed to happen where all of us had to go over there and vote. So appreciate you taking the time to stick with us.

Moving to our 3 o' clock agenda on the bills we just heard for decision making. First is House Bill 307 relating to special number plates. This is special number plates for Ho' Olawe. I'd like to recommend moving this forward with amendments. Just acknowledging the not wanting to overwhelm the counties.

There are some paths, I think, that are viable. We can work this out in future committees. But for the moment, we'll amend the Bill to restrict the design to no more than blank inches high by blank inches wide. Insert.

Secondly, an expansion of the decal size for all special number organizational plates to blank inches high by blank inches wide and make technical amendments. Note this has a defective date going to the Ways and Means Committee. Any discussion on this? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

For the Committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts. Chair's recommendation on HB307, House Draft 1 to pass with amendments. Chair Lee. Vice Chair goes aye. Senator Elefante? Senator Kanuha? Senator DeCorte? Measures adopted. Mr. Chair, thank you.

Moving to the next measure, House Bill 531, also relating to special number plates. This is the Hawaii Cancer Center. Similarly, move us forward with amendments with the same language restricting the design to no more than blank inches high by blank inches wide. And this will go on to Ways and Means similarly with a defective date.

So we can try and work this out and chat with the Cancer Center folks and the others as we move ahead. So there's no discussion on that. Vice Chair for the vote.

Chair's recommendation on HB531 House Draft 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with Reservations? Any no votes?Measure is adopted with five votes. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Moving on to House Bill 54 relating to motor vehicles. This is penalties for excessive speeding.

I'd like to recommend Moving forward to JDC with amendments number one, addressing the AG's amendments by removing subsection D7 on page six, lines 16 to 18, adding a new subsection E in section 291C-105 to mirror the identification processing procedure outlined in Section 846-2.5 hrs.

Secondly, additionally, for clarity, we'll amend Section 291C-105 D2, page six, lines four to six to specify that the revocation period begins upon release from imprisonment. Thirdly, for a second offense will make it no less than a 90 day license suspension, no more than 180 days. Fourth, will adopt a public defenders or will address the public defender's concerns.

For a third offense will change the jail term to no less than 10 days and no more than 30 days instead of just a straight 30J- 30 day jail term. And then finally it will change to no less than one year license suspension and no more than three years for that same subsequent third offense.

This also has a defective date going on to JDC where they can take a look at these penalties and see if they make sense. Any discussion on this measure?

Sorrry, just for clarity, I just wanted to confirm that this still does include the vehicle forfeiture.

Yeah, we're not. We're not changing that.

Okay, thank you. Thank you.

Okay. There's no further discussion. Vice Chair.

Chair's recommendation on HB 54, House Draft 2 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no vote? Mr. Chair, motion is adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to House Bill 706 relating to highway safety. This requires skateboard users to wear a helmet. Recommendations to pass with amendments making the effective date January 1, 3000. If there's no discussion on that. Vice Chair for the vote.

Chair's recommendation on HB706 House draft 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes?Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Moving on to House Bill 1231 relating to traffic safety. This is the first of the red light cam bills that we just heard. I'd like to recommend moving forward to WHAM and JDC with amendments.

I'd like to switch the language to mirror a Senate Bill that was previously heard and passed earlier this year which would authorize speed cameras where Safe Routes- where the Safe Routes Advisory Council recommends 25 school zones based on the best available data and crash and injury records that they have. Secondly, empowering the Highway Modernization Safety Council.

Sorry, Highway Safety Modernization council to recommend 25 intersections for additional red light cameras, again based on dangerous and crashes and incidents and other data, other data. Sorry, I'm like choking here. Excuse me.

Yes, I know. We all need water.

Oh, I'm good, thank you.

Okay, with that out of the way, next we'll include the language and maintain the language that for all these cameras, fines shall only be issued for no less than blank mile per hour violations over the speed limit, just to ensure that for the public you're not going to get one mile per hour over citation.

And that's just kind of silly since we've kind of been down that road before. Secondly, we want to adopt Appleseed's recommendation restricting the use of the data and images from these cameras for facial recognition purposes and anything other than explicit purposes outlined in the measure.

Thirdly, just noting the judiciary's testimony, we'd like to- currently the Bill moves the penalties and fines into the Safe Routes to School Program Special Fund.

So instead we'll leave the fines as they are currently where they would go to DOT and the Judiciary and support the program and implementation and hopefully help the Judiciary address the volume that could potentially result from implementation. So instead of that money going to the Safe Routes to Schools Fund, that's still an important thing.

So we'd like to add in language that directs funds to the Safe Routes Special Fund separately adding a penny per pound into the vehicle weight tax for only for vehicles over 4,000 pounds and 1.5 cents per pound for vehicles over 7,000 pounds.

Fifthly, add the contents of House Bill 1166, which is the next measure on the agenda, which was the appropriation for the Department of Transportation into and out of the Automated Speed Enforcement Systems Program Special Fund in order to effectuate and operate not only the cameras that they have now, but the cameras that would hypothetically be proposed for coming months and years, adopt a budget and finance amendments amending the preamble accordingly to demonstrate a clear nexus with all of this, adopting the Attorney General's recommendation that traffic abstracts and Insurance penalties in 291L shall mirror existing language in 291J10 not going on to driver abstracts, since the citation is for the vehicle and not the driver under this. And finally, with the AG.

AG's second recommendation match 291L5 to 291J6 with respect to mailing and process for issuing and request citations, accepting the requirement for a minimum speed over the limit to trigger a citation which we shall set, as I mentioned before, at no less than blank miles per hour over the speed limit.

Finally making technical amendments and acknowledging that there is an existing defective date of 3-1-3000. This measure. Also noting that DOT had asked for some of these provisions to be put into 291C108. But seeing as we didn't have time to go unravel all of the HRS here, we'll leave that up to Ways and Means and jdc.

Should this measure continue on there. So with that that was a lot, a lot of moving parts in this. Thank you guys for your patience. And is there any discussion on that? All right. Seeing none. Vice Chair then okay.

Chair's recommendation on HB 1231 House Draft 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations. Any no votes measure is adopted. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. So moving on to House Bill 1166. We're linked to Automated Speed Enforcement Systems program. This is the one we just bolted into that prior similar red light camera measure. So we'll defer this measure.

Up next is House Bill 235 relating to traffic safety which requires the Department of Transportation to expand the use of photo red light imaging detector systems. The North Shore. We've been talking about this for some time.

So as I think the intent here was to address some of the traffic safety issues on the North Shore through multiple means because we folded in the red light cams into the Bill we just moved out a minute ago will amend this Bill which goes on to Ways and Means in gdc adding a preamble noting that Kamehameha highway has some of the most dangerous miles for residents as it cuts through communities and has been recognized for decades as among the more dangerous stretches of highway in the state.

And then secondly change the Bill to rather than putting in photo red light or specifying photo red light systems in specific areas like the North Shore will direct the Safe Routes Advisory Council to work with the appropriate stakeholders to develop and prioritize three safe routes or I should say no less than three safe routes to schools projects serving schools that sit directly adjacent to Kamehameha highway in those communities.

This also has a Defective date of 7-1-3000. Any discussion on this one?

Chair's recommendation on HB 235 House direct one to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations. Any no votes? Any no votes? No measure is adopted. Mr.

Chair, is that a yes for a no vote or A no for a no vote.

I'm voting yes. Okay.

Okay. Thank you.

That was a tough question in the day.

Okay. Moving on to the next measure, House Bill 1164 relating to highway revenue bonds, which restores the revenue bond authorization for DOT recommendations. Move us forward. Just changing the effective date to January 1st, 3000. There's no discussion on that.

Chair's recommendation on HB 1164 House Draft 1 to pass with amendments. Any voting with reservations with five Members present. Any no votes? Measure is adopted. Mr.

Chair, thank you. Moving on to House Bill 1159 relating to commercial harbors. This is the Bill for evacuating harbors.

We appreciate, I think the intent here and it is important did want to take a moment to sort of see if we can get folks kind of on the same page because there have been some folks who've been raising a number of concerns.

So like to move us forward with amendments, basically setting up a task force to see if we can sort out some of these issues and also get the Coast Guard and other Members along with DOT to the table and see what we can come up with. So any discussions on that?

Okay. I think that's the the best thing to do with this measure. Mr. Chair, thank you very much. Chair's recommendation on HB 1159 House Draft 2 pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations. Any no votes. Measures adopted. Mr.

Chair, thank you. And then finally HB 1007 relating to the Hawaii Community Development Authority. We need just a little bit of time to sort out the the details. The intent here I think is to move this forward, adding in language that would give HCBA additional tools like the Community Financing District language that we had mentioned.

But just in the sheer rush of things in the last couple days, we haven't got to actually scripting that out. So we're going to fur this for decision making to our next hearing on Thursday. Excuse me, Thursday, March 203:02pm here in this room. 224.

Make sure we can get this right because if we can then hopefully we can send it back over and get it done. 302pm so that is our 3pm agenda. We have still for decision making our 3.02pm agenda which are measures previously heard in this Committee in prior days.

Up first on that one is House Bill 229 relating to transportation. This is a statewide speed restriction for motor vehicles traveling slow on the highway. We'd like to we're going to defer this also for decision making until Thursday, March 203:02pm here in room 224.

I'll just note this was a Joint Hearing and our counterpart Committee needs to also make the same recommendation. And so we need to make sure we're exactly on the same page here. Although I think there's no issues with the Bill so folks can breathe sigh of relief who are following it.

But with that we'll come back to it. So up next is House Bill 860 relating to liability. This is about.

So are you deferring this one just for DM? Okay, yeah.

House Bill 860 relating to liability. This is about roads in limbo, in particular on some of the neighbor islands. We'd like to keep the discussion going. We've been trying to work with some of the stakeholders and introducer there's still some time yet this would go on to judiciary and Ways and Means.

So we like to move forward with amendments and we're going to try and take a stab at threading the needle here. It may not be perfect but we have our, our, our good compatriots and interested folks on the neighbor islands who I'm sure can assist as we move forward.

So we're gonna make amendments amending the Bill to remove the immunity from liability that is currently in the Bill.

Secondly, we'll establish that for roads whose jurisdiction is in dispute between the state and a county, the state or county may undertake limited resurfacing of the existing road surface which shall not extend to any span of bridge or section of street that crosses a culvert without conferring ownership.

And then additionally any additional will specify that any additional liability for that particular road as a result of that limited resurfacing pursuant to this act shall be limited to the resurfacing and not the underlying non conforming issues present prior to any work being done.

And in the event of an incident, the liability shall be split proportionally between the share of the contributing cause for the incident between the party who resurfaced the road, the share that that may be responsible for, as well as the party responsible for the underlying road before anything was done.

Depending where fault lays and how much, we'll add in a five year sunset and we'll maintain the defective date in the measure.

But the idea here, in short, is to try and provide a pathway, hopefully that would allow both some of the unclaimed roads in limbo, in particular in rural areas, to be addressed by counties at least in a limited fashion, without undermining the ability for residents in the area to seek relief should there be some sort of incident and making sure that everybody can be made whole at the end of the day.

We hope that there's a long term solution to this for the neighbor islands. I don't think it's going to be this year now or maybe even this year, but this would hopefully spur a conversation at the very least. And if it needs to change going forward in the process, I know there are other committees to do that.

So we'll work with stakeholders along the way. So any discussion on this one?

Chair's recommendation on HB 6860 House Draft 1 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations. Any no votes. Measure is adopted. Mr.

Chair, thank you. Moving on to House Bill 1161 relating to transportation. This is the county road use charge. I'd like to move us forward making some amendments, adopting the DOT recommendations to address the hybrid inclusion at a later date.

So we'll be pulling that out as there's a study that's going to be reporting back at the end of this year with some recommendations for that. We'll add language that we inserted.

This Committee inserted into Senate Bill 1480, which was the companion measure that we passed over to the House that expanded the use of the State Highway Fund and highway funds for broader multimodal purposes.

We'll also adopt the alliance for Automotive Innovation recommendation prohibiting counties from assessing additional fees for evidence EVs or zero emission vehicles beyond the average paid by gas vehicles. I'll know this does have a defective date as it goes on for further consideration.

Okay. Chair's recommendation on HB 1161 House Draft 2 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations. Any no votes? No vote for me. Measure is adopted. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Moving on to hospital 925 relating to the arts. This was was the Performing Arts Special Fund funded by 1% of ticket revenues at state facilities. Like to recommend moving this forward with amendments just basically cleaning it up.

So a limit to 1% of ticket revenues for all concerts and events at state venues which are reasonably the primary purpose for which tickets are sold, excluding those events primarily performed by students at at the Department of Education or University.

So should address, I think the main issues that were raised about what do you do when there's a school play or that kind of thing. And again, this is a defective date. Going into ways and means. Any discussion on this?

Is this the measure that we had a lot of opposition? No, this is different. This is different.

They wanted this one. All right. Chair's recommendation on HB 924, House draft three to pass with amendments with five Member present. Any voting with reservations and in no votes. Measures adopted. Mr.

Chair, thank you. Moving on to House Bill 958 relating to transportation. This is the ebike Bill. I'd like like to recommend moving this.

What Bill is there? What agenda?

Same agenda. House Bill 958.

Zero, I don't have a net add on. Zero, I'm sorry. Yeah. Okay. All right. Okay. Apologies. Yes.

House Bill 958. Really? Transportation, this is the E Bike Bill. Just basically has a bunch of penalties and clarifications to streamline. I think some of the issues that we've been seeing in our various communities. We'd like to recommend moving this forward, passing with amendments. I'm going to say two things about this.

So one, with the amendments, what we're going to do is replace the contents of the measure and insert sections 237 through 1126 to 29 and 32 to 34 from SB 1117 SD2, this was the Senate companion measure that we passed out.

What this does is insert the penalty provisions from that measure, but not the E Bike rebate program and insurance provisions we'll add in a defective date of January 12050. I'll just say I really appreciate our counterpart Chair's work and those other committees on this measure.

The only reason why we're doing this right now is because to try and save drafting time for our drafters who are buried in stuff, rather than rewriting all the different amendments to try and clean up some of the loose ends, we'll insert our substantially similar but already scripted out version of the Bill and that'll go to conference where we can sort out some of the details.

So that's the only reason we're doing that. So any questions on that one?

Okay. Chair's recommendation on HB958, House Draft 2 to pass with amendments with five Members present. Any voting with reservations? Any Nobles hearing? None. Vice Chair. Measures adopted. Thank you.

And that is the last measure on our 3:02pm agenda. Thank you everybody for your patience.