Senate Standing Committee on Economic Development and Tourism

Foreign.

Welcome to the hearing with the Senate Committee on Economic Development and tourism. Today is March 202025. This is our 1:00pm agenda and we are in Conference Room 2 to 9. The hearing is being streamed live on YouTube.

In the unlikely event that we must abruptly end this hearing due to technical difficulties, the Committee will reconvene as soon as we are able to. The Committee has gone through all the testimony, so encourage if you would like to add comments, you have one. You will have one minute to do so.

This agenda has three bills, so we will go ahead and start off with HB449 relating to economic development. First up is Director Wayne Inouye from Hawaii Technology Development Corporation.

Good afternoon, Chair. Vice Chair, thank you for giving us the opportunity to testify on this Bill. HCDC strongly supports HP449. I think this gives HCDC an opportunity to really help in difficult times for manufacturers.

I think we're going through a period where we have some uncertainty on the Trump Administration of how they are planning to implement tariff tax. So we really need to look at some creative ways to integrate technology into our local manufacturing industries to really help get them over this hurdle.

Because I think we need to leverage our local talents, we need to leverage the resources that we have. But I think this Bill will help us get through this and really diversify Hawaii's economy to support tech and manufacturing. Thank you. Thank you.

Next up, Chamber of Commerce, Tonga Op on zoom.

Good afternoon, Chair. Good afternoon, Vice Chair. Thank you for this opportunity. Apologies that we're not able to be in person. We have a board meeting right now. But I like to stand in our testimony. The Chamber is in full support of the measure and here for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Lauren Zurbo with Hawaii Food Industry Association, also on zoom.

Good afternoon, Chair and Vice Chair. I'm Alexis Chapman for hfi. We'll stand on our testimony. I just want to say we have produced the main Hawaii festival for over 30 years now and we can say unequivocally that these programs work, Innovate works.

There are dozens of local companies that have improved their manufacturing through these programs and, and we're in strong support of this measure. Especially now. As one of the previous testifiers noted, this is absolutely the time we need this kind of support. So thank you and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Next up, Pam Tunpap from our Chamber of Commerce. In support, Montepura General Manager for what Not Be Floral. Also in support. Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Any questions? Okay, HTDC please win. So are you guys anticipating any reduction in federal funding for technology projects in Hawaii?

So currently chair we some of our federal funding on pause. We've been instructed by federal agencies to hold off on some of the die DEI type activities, especially in like right. For us we use like a lot of women owned. We have incarceration programs.

We've been put on pause for a little bit just until the Federal Government has actually kind of figured what's going to happen. So this is impacting a lot of our program? Well, not a lot. Two of our three programs that we do. So you know, the one thing that I'm more concerned about is a tariff. Right.

Because a lot of our, some of our local manufacturers do rely on importing some of our raw products overseas and these depending on what that is. Right. We do need to provide some programs to help offset some of that additional cost per unit that these manufacturings are.

So based on those cuts, how much of the programs are affected or should.

I say on pause for HCDC through our Innovate Hawaii program? Two out of the three.

So we have one by Department of Energy and we have our NIST MEP program that is hasn't really been affected as far as funding holding, but it does provide us a little bit of some bookends as far as guidance of how we can administer some of our programs.

So yeah, so you know, when you guys do selection, how do you guys select the projects? Like do you guys do small business first or do you categorize it?

So in General for HCDC for Innovate Hawaii programs, right. We, we do something what we call voice of the customer. Right. We go out into the field, we go out onto different islands. We understand what some of the problems are facing our local manufacturers and then we create programs.

So we go to RU areas, we went to the big Hawaii Island, Maui, Molokai and understanding some of these issues and then we create programs around that. We don't necessarily just go out and do programs. It's really about what some of the problems are. We focus our really our initiative of using local talent to solve local problems.

Right. So we need to just keep always that in mind as to what problem we're trying to solve.

So even when existing business had already gotten a grant and so they want to upgrade, I don't know, so farm purchase this type of equipment and then the following year they want to upgrade it into. So they're always sizers or whatever.

Yeah. So they're always open to apply again. But we do give priorities Right. So we do, you know, try and look at the list of companies that have applied and we always give priorities for first time applicants. We also this year looked at priorities given to tech companies that are integrating technology and automation.

So again, we do have a process. You know, we've been prioritizing our Lahaina companies on Maui for the last couple years to make sure that they can get back on their feet again. So there is a process that we do use to identify certain challenges.

And again this year for us, we aligned with the deeped priorities and the state priorities to look at certain critical areas and how do we leverage this money that are solving problems, our state problem. So there is a process, part of that process.

Do you guys provide workforce and training?

Yes, we do. So part of our Innovate Hawaii program in HCDC is about workforce development. And we've been partnering with the community college and the University and our Department of Labor to do apprenticeship programs to really help understand again, where the gaps are. Currently one of the biggest gaps that we're doing is in fashion. Right.

Fashion industry has been always kind on the back as far as integrating technology. So that's something that we've been doing. The other thing that we've been doing recently for the last couple years is really working with our local shipyards. Right. The shipyard is looking for technology as the Navy is investing in infrastructure out at Pearl Harbor.

So again, the workforce to really get our local apprentice up to speed with certain technologies that are going to help the shipyard.

Okay, thank you. Okay, moving on to HP1006 relating to the Agribusiness Development Corporation. First up, Wendy gated with adc.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair. I'm Wendy Gady. I'm with the Agribusiness Development Corp. And we stand in strong support. We One of the best examples that I can see is the Matsuda family on the North Shore in Kahuku Farms. They've been farming since the early 1900s. They are major papaya, banana and corn farmers.

They have since added a farm cafe as well as farm to table events. And it has really helped diversify their income. And by supporting this with adc, we think this would be a strong foundation for the future. I'm pretty sure that the ag parks under DOA do not allow ag tourism. And I'm here for any questions.

Thank you. Next up, DBID in support, Brian M. Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, Brian M. Farm Bureau will stand on testimony and support.

Thank you. Next up, Sher Manor Chamber of Commerce and support K. Maui Cham Maui Chamber of Commerce in support. Gil. Reverend ON Jones.

Aloha. Good afternoon. I. I question the need for ADC to, To support tourism on our state ag lands. I think we should be focused more. On the actual production, which was their original mission. But if it is the will to keep this moving, we have to have some, some guardrails.

And my testimony talks about the Italian process for agritourism, where they require a minimum standard of, of income from the actual agricultural production. And I would hope that the, the Committee can incorporate maybe a 25% or 50% of the revenue from the state agriculture. Lands should be derived from agriculture.

And that's as my wish and suggestion to you folks. Thanks for letting me testify.

Thank you. Next, Kathleen Panhinui in opposition. And is there anybody else wishing to testify on the measure? See? None. Questions? Wendy.

So this Bill is just giving you the opportunity to do promotion of agricultural tourism, but you're not asking for any money, correct?

Good afternoon, Chair. Vice Chair. Wendy Gady with adc. And no, we are not. And I was just listening to Gil's testimony and I do think he's right. There is an obligation for us, especially with state lands, to produce food.

And I think having a high, high standard in terms of the amount of revenue generated from the farm or number of acres, we would be more than open to doing that. We're just, we're not asking for any cash. We're just asking to update our statute to include agritourism.

And this is at the request of many of our farmers who are asking for help in learning how Kualoa Ranch did it, how Kahuku Farms did it, and what, if any, help. Our sister agency, the Hawaii Tourism Authority, can help in supporting these farmers.

But there's no anticipation that in the future you're going to ask for marketing monies and help. zero, okay. And then I, I recall, like, before Sharon Herd became Director of ag, she was in their kind of marketing. Can't remember what the division was called.

If we're going to give this kind of tourism and economic development responsibility to you, should we just dissolve that division?

That's a decision that's above my pay grade. I think she's done a wonderful job in the market development branch. I guess I hate to say it, but I would defer to Farm Bureau on that. We're not asking for that in this Bill.

Well, we're just adding and making government bigger. Right. So we give you power and potential resources. Why do we have this other area in ag that does exactly the Same thing. Brian, you want to weigh in on that five barrel.

We saw you. Is this on video?

Live around the globe. We're transparent. Yeah.

Chair. Vice Chair Brian Mimoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. Could you repeat the question slideshare?

So within the Department of Agriculture I know there's kind of a marketing thing. I can't remember what it was called that Sharon heard was in charge of because I dealt with her Made in Hawaii. How are we going to redefine that?

So if we're going to kind of move some of these agricultural promotional responsibilities to adc should we just get dissolved that division in egg.

So first of all, Vice Chair, I believe you're referring to the Agriculture Development Division, one of the divisions within the Department of Agriculture. And there's a market development branch, the marketing branch, within which. Which does I believe what you're talking about, the marketing for Department of Agriculture and for Agriculture in General. Your question about dissolving.

I think that's a policy decision. As a representative of the Hawaii Farm Bureau of Farmers and Ranchers, we absolutely advocate for our Department of Agriculture. But at the end of the day it's a. The policy decision we believe and we do understand trying to be more efficient on. On how the Legislature appropriates money.

So again a policy decision. We think they do amazing work, great work. But we do understand that there is. Isn't this a tourism question? Agriturism. We hear what you're saying and I think it may be worth further discussion. But we also don't want to see overlap when unnecessary.

And we would like to see our Department of Agriculture, along with their partner who is now under DB at ADC work cohesively to accomplish the goals that we want to support, promote and grow agriculture to include agritourism.

Most of us think about the Department of Agriculture regulatory fight this virus, fight this pest, don't use this pesticides or what have you. And that Marketing division was just that one little area where it was actually to promote agriculture. You look at edc, their entire existence is to be promoting agriculture. Grow more stuff, get it out to.

To market. So should we move that division and that's all the responsibilities. I should put that into ADC along with tourism promotion.

Again, Vice Chair, that's a policy decision in your right. Department of Agriculture has a lot of regulatory functions. They have some other functions like the marketing branch, like the Agriculture Development Division which also does the statistics, does loans, which isn't necessarily regulatory. We have the agriculture research, management, the land and water.

So there is A high functionality of regulatory functions. Whereas ADC is our development, our production agency for agriculture. So again, a policy decision, as the Executive Director of ADC says, above her pay grade. And her pay grade is above my pay grade. So I'm not really sure if I'm qualified to.

But we do hear what you're saying and we have heard discussions along those lines of trying to consolidate certain functions within certain agencies for more efficiency. And at the farm, we absolutely want to see efficiency. We want to see our taxpayer dollars being spent the best way they can so that we can grow our agricultural sector.

Okay, so let me rephrase the question. If you were me, would you consolidate, get rid of this division in Ag and move it over to ad?

If I were.

If you were the policymaker, not the mumble jumble, it's above my pay grade, I could touch this. But you, you know better than most of us in this room about how agriculture can be more efficient, more functional.

We seem to have like this one little hanging area, marketing division or whatever in egg, and maybe we should just move that over here that ag can be purely more regulatory and ADC can be clearly to promote the growth of agriculture.

That's a, that's a difficult question, Senator, for me to answer in this format and forum. May I get back to you, Senator?

Sure. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Brian. Stop. So, so Brian, you know, when ADC was created, ADC was meant to do bigger tracts of land for growing crop. What is the impacts that have occurred while tourism and agritourism has it disrupted. More. Adjacent farms that just want to do agriculture?

Thank you, Chair. Yes. When ABC was formed, I believe back in the 90s was to transition from plantation sugar and pine to more diversified agriculture. And as you heard the Executive Director say, it was to grow food. We believe food, feed, fiber, fuel and floriculture to, to grow agriculture.

Not every farmer, ranch would like to do or agriculture business would like to do agritourism. I couldn't sit and say that there aren't impacts to surrounding farms and businesses that don't engage in agriculture tourism.

And so, you know, being select and prescriptive on who does it, I think is a conversation always we need to have, especially as Executive Director said, for our public lands.

So, but in that what, you know, agriculture, tourism or ag tourism helps support, we look at as a value added operation for agriculture to help support income streams and possibly profitability for our farmers and ranchers. So although we are supportive of it, we do understand that we don't want Negative impacts.

Again, agriculture land should support the agriculture production. We've looked at agritourism as something we support as accessory, but again as accessory to the primary operation of agricultural food, feed, fiber, fuel or floriculture production. So there can be impacts. And I believe that's why we support the county zoning authority over agriculture, tourism.

They know better what's what the, the differences in their county, what they'd like to see from a zoning perspective. We believe that's where the authority lies also for the enforcement. It is an enforcement issue.

So we do see some abuses, but we also see successes like Ali' I Kula Lavender, Greenwood Coffee Farms and many coffee farms that do coffee farm tours, but also education and outreach. Hawaiian Vanilla Company here on Oahu. You heard Koku Farms, Koolo Ranch.

Brian, if we, if we pursue the agritourism side of this, how much would you say If I had 100 acres of land should be under production and then how much should be used for agritourism? If we went on a percentage, Our.

Position has always been the high percentage of the land should be for agriculture production. Again, different.

Do you have a percentage in mind.

That should be in ag production at the county level? I think we landed on 51% of the arable or farmable land because not all the lands on a particular parcel is farmable. You may have gullies, hillside, 100 acres.

Of all farmable land. No gullies, no mountains, no trees. What percentage would you, Quite frankly, Chair?

51% is probably the floor. I mean, if you can at least have 51% of your lands and agricultural production that is farmable, then you know that that may be of concern again. And these are public lands, so they should be a high percentage of. Of ag production. And as you have heard the ADC say. Right.

They are willing to adopt or consider higher standards than private lands.

So wouldn't you think that if I produced more as we talk about sustaining and then lessening the imports from outside, that it should be higher of a production versus because the tourism part of it. I would think if we value adding, we usually get 10 times plus. Right.

So in order for me to value add, I would need more land underproduction so that I can value add. The other percentage in this case, whether or not I included technology, like through htdc, kind of like. And I just go see, like Larry Jeff, which he doesn't do value add, he just continues to grow.

And he's been a big landowner, farmer with ADC and also a Member of the Farm Bureau.

So, yes, again, we view agritourism as a value add, as a mechanism to increase farm revenue or revenue to the farm business or ranch business. But we also view it as a privilege. Again, your primary activity should be agriculture. So, so, yes, I mean, again, higher standards, agricultural production should be the primary.

But when we start talking about percentage of income. So you use, if you say the farm is making $100,000 a year off the ag production, they start incorporating agritourism. And so now agritourism, they make $10,000, $20,000, $30,000.

At some point, say they're making $200,000 off of their ag tourism operation, but they're still having the same output from their farm production. They shouldn't be penalized. And so again, this, it's a, I think, a deeper conversation. And that's why the sit in county for the land use ordinance update Bill 10, which ultimately became Bill 64.

It took almost three years, and there's still some cleanup that we believe needs to happen.

We want to support ag tourism and some of these accessory activities, but we also want to make sure, as former Senator Riviera said, there are guardware rails in there and there are requirements in there to ensure that there is the agriculture production that we want. That is, again, the primary that should be on those ag lands.

Thank you, Brian. Wendy. So, Wendy, how many farms are currently engaged in agritourism?

Good afternoon, Chair and Vice Chair of Wendy Gady with adc. Are you referring to farmers or tenants on our land?

Yeah, on your land, Zero. What potential do you see the expansion of agritourism in the state.

On public land as well as private?

Just yours.

Just on ours. Are you asking about like a number in terms of number of farmers, or are you asking about acres, Talking about.

Farmers.

I would say for our farms, you know, less than 20. Because to your point, you know, some people, you know, you think about Larry Jeffs. He is the largest banana grower in the United States. And that's one of the things that, you know, I, I personally believe that everybody should be able to farm the way they want.

You know, I, I don't want to go to your farm and tell you what to do. You don't want to come to my farm and tell me what to do. And if he doesn't want to do ag tourism, that's fine. He shouldn't have to do that.

But if you are growing bananas and you want to do dried bananas and trail mix and you want to sell that, and that is what Sustains your farm. I've listened to John Morgan for years talk about his ag tourism supports his business and it also provides seven day a week fresh farm food in a food desert. But.

And he does that for his community as well. I, I don't oppose having some guardrails. I think that's really important. And I acknowledge, and I believe in our statute that we were here for local food production, but we also know about 40% of that production just gets plowed under because it's got a dent.

It doesn't have the four nodules on the bottom of the bell pepper. So the retailers don't want it. So they want to be able to, you know, chop it up. But at the same time, shouldn't the farmer be able to sell that to the consumer?

Zero, by all means. And I would think that they would kind of utilize some of the hubs or innovation centers because most of us know that the farms do not have the potential to move into that direction. Because under adc, you guys are meant to grow and to produce on your tracks of land.

So I'm going to ask you the same question that Senator Wakai asked Brian Miyamoto. Do you believe that the marketing division should be transferred over into ADC chair?

This chair just got really hot all of a sudden.

It's going to get hotter.

I think that it is a policy decision and I and ADC are not the policy makers. We carry things out. So I would defer back to you and say whatever you think is in the best interest of the state, we will carry that out, whatever that is.

But I do agree that the Department of Ag has done a wonderful job. They have done some amazing work with the farmers in the market development branch.

So that's my concern. It's almost as if we lost the entire marketing branch, which is why we come back to this Bill and why agritourism is in this Bill is what is it going to take for the Department of Ag to diversify it to the point of what you're asking in the Bill for agritourism.

I don't think I can speak on behalf of the Department of Ag or what they should be doing. I just look at the fact that we did not come up with this on our own. We have tenants that are saying, you know, this isn't your. In your statute, which you consider.

Because I want to know how other people are successful. I don't need to make the same mistakes everybody else is making. We would like to have some guidance. We'd like to have Some support. Maybe we would like to have a juice bar because all we're doing is fruit production.

You don't need the prettiest fruit to be doing a juice bar. Perhaps we'd like to do that.

So what do we send in for the Department of Ag to handle that portion of it? While ADC lands was meant, like again, I would say, to produce on a larger scale, which is why your biggest tenant is Larry Jeff. And that was the reason for those tracks of land.

So the lands that you have, what are the parcels cut up for? Sizes? What are the sizes of your ABC lands?

We have parcels on Oahu that are as small as 5 acres. We have some that are well beyond 500 acres. It's just based on the TMK. So it's kind of the, the big gamut.

I think people in the past have thought we only work with large farmers and they don't realize that we have a lot of small, disadvantaged farmers. We just don't trot them out in front of everybody all the time. And we're trying to support them as well.

And I'm very excited to share with you that at the board meeting for ADC this morning, the board chose to award 23 new licenses to farmers. So that means on Oahu our inventory is going to go from, you know, maybe 10 to 12% to almost nothing.

And the hardest thing in the world is to tell a farmer that you are an awesome farmer. We just don't have enough land to give you. That is heartbreaking. So.

So if you guys do push into agritourism, who should enforce the, the fact that those lands say, whether it be 50%, 55%, 75% is under production, while the other 25 is within the law to be doing tourism.

Well, one of the things that the board chose to do, which I think is brilliant, is with the newest round of licensees, there's a requirement for an annual report because every year EDC gives an annual report to the Ledge.

And moving forward, it would be really wonderful if we could quantify on all our lands how many full time jobs, how many part time jobs, what's the amount of poundage of food production coming off.

I don't think that's unfair to ask the individuals that are on state land to produce a report that we can fold into ours, that we can share. And we have very, very active property managers. We don't wait at the mailbox for the checks to roll in. They're out there every day.

We got a phone call earlier this week. Somebody Said, I think that somebody's driving onto the road from your lands and leaving a mess. We went out, took pictures. It was not our farms, but we went out immediately. We're very, very active in managing our lands.

So I guess you would consider the annual report to be site visits to assess exactly what your tenant is doing and then to report back that each tenant is within standards. And if not, I'm assuming that there's some kind of warning or consequence making sure that production is underway versus it over mounting tourism.

So that's one of the unique abilities of adc, is we have the ability to take land back. And if you're not managing it and you don't have a conservation plan in place and you're. You're grading and grubbing, you're going to be in violation and you'll be put on a performance improvement program.

So either you're going to be compliant or you're going to basically give the land back because we have a lot of good farmers that are waiting for land.

Sounds good. Thank you.

No, I have great respect for your vision, your collaborative spirit. So let me rephrase a question. If the Legislature were to give you responsibility for marketing Agriculture, would you accept it or would you be opposed to that?

We would accept it.

Okay.

At your decision, we're not making that policy call, but we would carry it out to the best of our ability.

So in my many discussions with the marketing branch of the Department of Agriculture, it was always about stonewalling, not doing anything different. It took me five years to get the Department of Agriculture to go move their paper app onto a digital format.

I've been trying for years to redo Made in Hawaii, but they keep a tight grip on it and don't want to look at anything outside of what comes out of the ground as Made in Hawaii. So I find that that division is very resistant to change and doing anything that's innovative.

And I find you to be the complete opposite of that. I think it'd be absolutely in good hands if we gave that responsibility to you.

Thank you for the compliment, but I think the compliment belongs to the board and the fact that we have a complete board that is active that's on fire about our statute, holds my feet to the fire to deliver on the statute.

I think really the complement belongs to the board that has the vision to really push things forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, next up, HB 1467 relating to housing resiliency. First up, Luke Meyers on zoom with Hawaii Governor Recovery and Resiliency.

Chair, Vice Chair. Good afternoon. Luke Meyers, Branch Chief Recovery Resiliency Unit. We sent our testimony offering comments. I just would like to say that very passionate about this opportunity here in the state. I know we have a number of competing priorities but as we see our larger hazard risk continue with aging infrastructure specifically on the single family residential side.

The IBHS and fortified standards for homes, I think could help a number of areas in the community not only at the parcel level for property owners but on the larger insurance side.

I think this investment you know along the lines with the priorities that are out there between the legend the gov should be supported they both for any questions. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next up, James Barros, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency on Zoom.

Hello [hawaiian]. On behalf of administrator [unintelligible] on in a conference in D.C. we just again it's Haima Executive Officer. We are in full support. We stand on our written testimony.

But we also wanted to highlight the fact that for each dollar we spent on some of these mitigation measures including the retrofitting residential properties will help save the state $13.

So for whichever agency takes over the retrofit program, it would be best for them to realize that savings as well as the insurance costs and liabilities that are forthcoming especially with the flood insurance program being in flux right now at FEMA. So just wanted to highlight those things and available for any questions but thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Gwen [unintelligible. Thank you. Next up, Dean Minakami for Hawaii Health. Thank you. Next up, Jeff Mikulina, Hawaii Climate Advisory Team. Thank you. Lindsay Garcia testifying for Hawaii Realtors in support. Jeff Mikulina testifying Hawaii Executive Collaborative Climate Hawaii in Support. And then Dr. Kioni Dudley on Zoom.

Hear me? There we go. Yes. Madam Chair and Vice Chair, I'm Dr. Kioni Dudley. I brought the experts together and created the one hour video the new hurricane threat for Hawaii. I support this bill, but I also want to propose changes. The bill as it reads would strengthen single family houses only.

It states that condominiums will not be funded. This needs to be changed. We have windows and glass doors now that can withstand 200 mile an hour plus winds. And condos can be fortified far more cheaply than houses and most can be far safer than houses.

There are other things I want to ask you to put into the bill. The bill strengthens houses already built. We need to also say that new houses need to be built to withstand strong hurricanes. And all new houses need to have safe rooms with attached bathrooms that can withstand 200 mile an hour winds.

The builder DR Horton says these only cost 5,000 to $7,000. We also have no hurricane shelters that can withstand a Category 3, 4, or 5 hurricane. There's nowhere for anyone to go. Nowhere for you to go. We need this bill to also get funds for fortifying current hurricane.

Thank you. Mr. Dudley tour time is up. And we have your testimony in front of us as well.

Okay, thank you so much.

Perfect timing. Lindsay, you're up. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify? Seeing none. Members, any questions for the testifiers? And we are on HP 1467. Senator Wakai, go ahead.

I'm looking at the bill and there's no dollar figure for appropriations. I looked at all the committee reports and there's never been a mention of how much money we're going to put in here. What are your expectations on the dollar?

Yeah, so I would say it's, it's going to take a lot of money but maybe starting with $10 million to get started. There are about 60% on Oahu, just Oahu and the neighbor islands are similar that don't aren't, the roofs are not attached to the rest of the house. So there's a lot of dwellings that are at risk.

It seems like a very, very expensive project or program to start implementing. I mean I can't imagine it's going to be $10 million going to be well north of that. I mean for the, for the homeowner by doing your own retrofit on your own dime, there's a savings from on the insurance side. Right.

So there's, there's already pressures for the homeowner to take their own safety and the protection of their property in their own hands. Why does the state need to do that?

So you know, for those who can. So Alabama found that once they started their fortified program they. I can't, I can't off the top of my head remember the numbers. But there were far more homeowners who actually did their own because it was the education part of that because they could afford it. This program has income qualifications.

So it's not for every homeowner. It's for those who can be supported and it helps take care of the upfront costs.

Okay. That's what we started out seeing when we did initially created gems way back when and all of a sudden Jen started like in that entire solar program started burning a $72 million hole into our annual budget at one time it's like $115 million in taxpayers went to people kind of with the same approach of you can't afford it, so the government's going to come in there and help you put solar on your roof.

And this I just see is going down that same path of, okay, we're going to start off by, like, you cannot afford to put clips or whatever it is with shatterproof windows on there, and this thing's just going to balloon to be very, very expensive.

Well, as Professor Dudley mentioned, you know, for every dollar spent, the state will save $13. If you can imagine, after a hurricane, after Lahaina, it was difficult housing people. The families that could not live in their homes, their homes were destroyed in the case of a hurricane, without a roof and with a water damage. Following that, we would need to at least temporarily house these families, too.

Senator Kim.

Talks about income limits. What are we talking about?

Less than 140%. So it's the low to moderate area, median income per head, if needed. And if by the will of the Legislature, it could be reduced to lower the income levels.

Yeah, but how many of the lower income levels actually own homes?

Yeah, so that's where the tension is. Right. So even with housing per se. Right. It's. It's that 80 to 140. That is that gap that doesn't get any subsidies. And these are the working, the [unintelligible], the working poor that are struggling right now.

Yeah. So if all of them in that bracket decide that they need this, how much money is that going to be?

So that I, I don't have.

But then you should, because if you come in here with that, we should know, because.

We can get, we can get, we can get an estimate.

What Senator Makai said, you know, we can't be everything to everybody. So is it just the roofs that's going to need repair? What else is going to be repaired?

And then, you know, we have people that have maybe higher incomes, but they still can't afford to, if there's a disaster to put a roof on, because they have other things going on. Right. Other debts that you're not aware of. So it's like we're asking the general public to fund this, and we don't know to what degree that we're funding in.

I mean, we can make an estimate. The challenge is we don't know exactly what people's income levels are. But I'll ask Dr. Tian if he has an estimate of the number of households in that threshold, then the second filter would be how many of those homes were built before 1994. Right. Because that's when hurricane clips became mandated. Right. So we can try and get that figure.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions? So, Gwen, you know, and I guess in regards to disaster, does it, I mean, I would think the Governor, which is why they have an emergency fund. I mean, we saw what that costs. So going forward, is this the route we're looking at going down? Because I think the challenge has always been.

How do you guys go about prioritizing who we do first, irregardless of income? You know.

My guess it would be speaking for Dean. My guess it would be first come for sure. Right. I'm not sure based if they're eligible. The emergency fund, I understand is after the disaster. Right. So that's to help with what we're trying to do. It's like an HMO plan for medical insurance. Right.

You're trying to prevent something worse that can happen and, and do it ahead of time. Because once, once you have cancer, it's going to cost a lot more, right? Once the disaster happens, it's going to cost a lot more. So it's kind of a preventative measure.

So you're saying when you plan something, I would think, because the question has always been the cost of living. When you look at today, I think I struggle with the cost of living, but the cost of managing and what is the priority of what I need and what I want.

So at some point, if you're going to build a three bedroom house that you cannot afford in a planning process is the State, should the State step in and you know, now, because the planning which is, I mean, you know, I'm going to say one public school and I would think that, you know, at some point the taxpayers that are going to be paying are not, you know, happy about us doing prevention for everybody. And yet being left out of the mix as a blue collar working individual and then figuring out the prioritization.

Right. So actually, so this is not for new buildings. Right, this is for older dwellings that were built before 1994, before the code change changed requiring these hurricane clips to attach the roof to the rest of the house. So it really is for the older homes that were built a long time ago.

My guess it's they're probably Kupuna, you know. And again, the Alabama model found that once they started helping with this program, the visibility and education caused more people to actually do their own homes who could afford it. So Alabama helped the ones who couldn't.

So I think the Climate Resiliency has a book about that and planning and what you should buy to retrofit. I find it hard that we're at that level of now. We're buying everything to retrofit homes. That really needs planning within individual. Okay, thank you. Sorry. Any other questions? Seeing none I'm going to resist for decision making.

Okay, we are decision making on HB449HD1 relating to economic development. We are going to make amendments.

We're going to pass it on SD1 by adding the following clause to Section 2 the way technology development Corporation shall submit an annual report to the Legislature no later than 20 days prior to the convening of each regular session detailing one the number and types of businesses assisted through the program 2.

The amount of funding allocated per business 3. Measurable economic impacts including jobs created, revenue increases and expansion of local manufacturing 4. Any challenges encountered in implementing the program and 5 recommendations for future funding adjustments.

Also, prioritize small and medium sized manufacturers by further modifying Section 2 to include funding shall be prioritized for businesses with fewer than 100 employees with a primary focus on local product development, advancing manufacturing and workforce training and ensure funds are used for manufacturing and no other purposes by adding the following clause to Section 2, funds appropriated under this act shall be used exclusively for one Technology upgrades and equipment acquisition for local manufacturers to workforce training and upskilling programs through marketing and promotion of Hawaii made products and for research and development for new or improved manufacturing technique techniques.

Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote Chair goes Aye. I vote yes. Senator Fukunaga, Senator Kim Aye. Senator Awa Aye. Chair your recommendations adopted. Thank you.

Next HP1006 relating to agribusiness Development Corporation we are going to pass with an SD1amending the definition of agricultural tourism to a specified agricultural tourism activity shall be secondary to the principal agricultural use of which shall constitute at least 75% of the total farming activity and B Prohibit agricultural tourism activities from interfering with farm operations of adjacent or surrounding farms.

2. Clarifying the definition of enterprise to a Specify that not more than 25% of the total farming operation and B require at least 75% of the total farming operation to be dedicated to active crop production or livestock farming in the Committee report will reflect Agricultural Development Division to transfer to adc.

Any discussion that's in the reporters at the amendment.

I mean in the Sorry in the amendment to have Agriculture Development Division to transfer to adc. Any discussion? Seeing None. Vice Chair for the vote Chair goes Aye.

I vote with reservations. Senator Fukunaga Aye. Senator Kim Aye. Senator AWA no. Chair your recommendations adopted.

Okay, thank you. And lastly HP 1467 relating to housing resiliency. While we have. I believe we have a lot of challenges working on this, I'm going to move to defer this Bill indefinitely. And with that, we are adjourned. Thank you.