House Floor

Will the House come to order? Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Roll Call] Madam Speaker, 48 Members are present. Two are excused.

Item number two, reading of the journal. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, may this matter be deferred?

So ordered. Item number three, messages from the Governor. Mr. Clerk, are there any messages from the Governor?

Yes. Madam Speaker, we're in receipt of Governor's message number 10, informing the House that a tentative agreement has been made with the University of Hawaii Professional Assembly collective bargaining unit 7 and transmitting a proposed measure to fund appropriate cost items. May this matter be received and filed.

So ordered. Item number four, Senate communications. Mr. Clerk, are there any Senate communications?

Yes. Madam Speaker, if you and the Members will turn your attention to the addendum to today's order of the day. We are in receipt of a communication informing the House that the Senate has disagreed to the amendments proposed by the House to the noted Senate bills. We are in further receipt of communications returning the noted House bills, all having passed third reading in the Senate.

Representative Todd.

Madam Speaker, I move to disagree to the amendments made by the Senate to the noted House bills.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Members, any discussion? All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The motion is carried. Members, are there any introductions? Representative Lowen.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. My staff is in the gallery today, somewhere up there. Hi. For the first time. So we have my office manager Charlotte Brown, committee clerk Sierra Khani, and leg. aide Kennya Rodea. Welcome to your House of Representatives.

Members, any further introductions? Okay. Seeing none, we will move on to the order of the day. Item number 5A, unfinished business. Members, we are on part one consent calendar 5A and 6A. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules of the House in order to consider certain Senate bills for third reading by consent calendar.

Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any questions? All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The motion is carried. Representative Todd.

Madam Speaker, I move to adopt the standing committee reports listed on pages one through seven and that the Senate bills listed on pages one through eight as may be amended past third reading.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Members, there will be no discussion as these items are agreed to by this body for placement on the consent calendar. Representative Morikawa for the vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, all majority Members vote aye with the exception of the following. On page four, stand com report number 1999, SB number 328, SD 1, HD 2. The following vote no. Amato, Iwamoto.

On page seven, stand com report number 1941, SB 325, SD 1, HD 1. Rep. Iwamoto votes no. On page eight, stand com report number 1944, SB number 383, SD 2, HD 1. Rep. Iwamoto votes no. For stand com report number 1946, SB number 1464, HD 1. Rep. Iwamoto votes no.

Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, on the measures before us, all minority Members vote aye.

Members, have all votes been cast? Said bills pass. Said Senate bills pass third reading. Members, please remember to submit to the Clerk the list of Senate bills on the consent calendar for which you will be inserting written comments in support or opposition. This must be done by adjournment of today's floor session. We will now take a short recess prior to the convening of the ordinary calendar. Recess subject to the call of the Chair.

Will the House come to order? Members, we're on part 2, ordinary calendar, item 5B, unfinished business. Representative Todd.

Madam Speaker, I move to adopt the standing committee reports listed on pages nine through 14 and that the accompanying Senate bills as may be amended pass third reading.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, second the motion.

Is there any discussion on these items beginning with House standing committee report number 1973? Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Standing committee report 1974. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Standing committee report 1976. 1978. 1979. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. 1981. 1982. 1986. 1987. Representative Pierick.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

So this Bill, I believe, would allocate about $2,000 towards a mental health counselor to do assessments towards people convicted of crimes. And this would include their initial assessment and their follow up visits in court. That's a lot of money, $2,000.

I'm a licensed mental health counselor and we only get about $130 from the insurance company to do that initial assessment. About $110 for reoccurring visits. So for $2,000 for maybe a couple sessions in court, that's a lot of money. So I'm voting no.

Standing Committee Report 1991, 1994 Representative Iwamoto.

With reservations, so ordered.

1995 Representative Belatti, with reservations. Request to insert written comments. So ordered. Representative Iwamoto, thank you.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

I just want to share that the description states amends the retirement allowance for a Member who first earns credited service as a judge after June 30, 2031 to 1.75% of the judge's average final compensation for each year of credited service as a judge.

What it doesn't state is that this is a reduction for judges from 3.0% to 1.75%. And it's according to the judiciary's testimony in opposition. It is highly consequential. It reduces retirement benefits for new judges and will adversely affect recruitment of judicial applicants. There are currently many vacancies and they are having a hard time filling vacancies.

Thank you very much.

Representative Perruso with reservations and request to insert written comments. So ordered.

Representative Souza.

With reservations, so ordered.

We're at the top of page 12. Standing committee report 1996. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Report number 1997. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Report 1998. Representative Muraoka.

Opposition. You know, I appreciate the intent of this bill. Our farmers and ranchers face theft and vandalism daily, costing them over $14 million. While I support the efforts to address this issue, our county police department can handle this. They're just severely understaffed. And on our state side, our DLNR can handle this. They are also severely understaffed.

I don't think it's wise to create another entity to go after this that then we would also have to staff. We should focus our efforts on staffing these already positions to go and address what they're there for. That's the reason for my opposition.

Standing committee report number 2004. Top of page 13. Standing committee report 2005. 2007. 2007. Representative Amato.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Iwamoto.

Is this for 2007? Reservations.

So ordered.

Okay. Members, standing committee report 2009. 2011. Top of page 14. Standing committee report 2012. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. 2014. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Report number 2015. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you. I rise in support with reservations. And my reservations are it's this. Hawaii should get producer credits on film or TV shows and get a pro rata share of profits if there are any for producers who also put in cash to make movies. For instance, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle was made around 2016 for approximately $90 million. That was their budget.

To date, the worldwide box office gross is $926.5 million. That is obviously a tenfold return. And I don't know how much Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle received in Hawaii film tax credits. But let's say they received 1/10 or $9 million worth of tax credits from Hawaii taxpayers. Shouldn't Hawaii taxpayers get the same access to gains or profits that other producer investors of this size? Thank you very much.

Okay. Standing committee report number 2017. Okay, Representative Morikawa for the vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, I'll majority Members vote Aye with the exception of the following on page 9, the . report number 1978 SB number 662 SD1 HD3 Rep. Amato votes no. On page 11 Standcom report number 1994 SB number 1361 HD2 Rep. Amato votes no.

Standcom report number 1995 SB number 935 SD2 HD3 following vote no Amato, Iwamoto. On page 13, Standcom report number 2011 SB number 1042 SD1 HD1 the following vote no Kila, Kitagawa, Lamasao, Matayoshi.

Thank you, Representative Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, all minority Members vote Aye with the exception of the following. On page 9 SCR 1976 Senate Bill 865 SD1 HD2. Rep. Pierick votes no. H10 SCR 1979 SB 1669 SD2 HD3 Rep Pierick votes no. SCR 1981 SB 960 SD1 HD2 Rep. Pierick votes no. SCR 1982 SB 1419 SD1 HD repair votes no.

SCR 1986 SB 222 SD1 HD2 Reps. Garcia and Moraoka vote no. AG 11 SCR 1987 SB 264 Rep. Pierick votes no. SCR 1991 SB 1469 SD2 HD2 Reps. Alcos, Garcia, Moraoka and Pierick vote no. SCR 1995 Senate Bill 935 SD2 HD 3 Rep. Pyrrhic votes no. AG 12 SCR 1996 SB 164 SD2 HD2 rep Moraoka votes no.

SCR 1997 SB 1589 SD3 HD2 reps. Garcia and Pierick vote no. SCR 1998 SB 763 SD2 HD3 reps. Garcia, Moraoka and Perrick vote no. SCR 2004 SB 1431 SD1 HD2 reps. Alcos, Moraoka, Shimizu and Pierick vote no. AG 13 SCR 2005 SB 1448 SD2 HD2 reps. Garcia, Moraoka and Pierick vote no.

SCR 2009 SB 443 SD1 HD2 rep Pierick volt snow SCR2011 SB 1042 SD1 HD1 rep Pierick votes no. AG 14 SCR 2014 SB 104 SD2 HD3 reps. Alcos, Garcia, Moraoka and Pierick vote no. SCR 2017 SB 227 SD1 HD2 reps. Garcia and Muraoka Vote no.

Have all votes been cast?

Said Senate Bills Passed Third Reading.

Representative Todd

Madam Speaker, I move. To adopt the Standing Committee reports listed on pages 15 through 19 and that the accompanying Senate bills as may be amended past third reading.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any discussion on these items beginning with Standing Committee report number 2018. 2019 representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm sorry but can you go back to SCR2018 please?

Okay, let's finish 2019 first. Representative Garcia.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Matsumoto.

Reservations and permission. Insert written comments in the journal.

So ordered.

Okay, we'll go back to standing committee report number 2018. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition with comments, please. This bill is all about our Native Hawaiian community through the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, protecting their rights and promoting their well being, as well as complying with previously enacted laws.

Although the intent is good with some very good parts, in conversation with OHA, they shared a few critical objections included in this bill. They do not agree with the language "draft settlement" and request a more specific payment term. Also, OHA should have a fourth seat on the Public Land Trust Working Group to have parity and appropriate representation.

Note that the current working group is six total with three selected by the Governor and three selected by OHA. And also because of the seriousness and weight of this critically important study and report, the tasking of the Legislative Reference Bureau to retain independent third party professionals for the working group should be tasked to Budget and Finance to allow a higher level oversight and handling.

Because some of these objections are too important to agree to and leave it to conference committee hoping the necessary changes will be made, I need to oppose this bill and pray that the working group can continue to make important progress in identifying the inventory of ceded lands that can help establish the proper mandated payments owed. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Garcia.

In opposition. And I'd like to adopt the words of the previous speaker as my own. Thank you.

So ordered. Representative Hussey.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Holt.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In strong support. You know, I know that maybe all the conditions are not perfect for this measure, but in all my years here, this is the furthest that we've gotten towards working towards the correct inventory for OHA.

This Public Land Trust inventory is very important to settle the claims to ensure that OHA is receiving its fair share of its 20%. I do thank and acknowledge the comments from the previous speaker and OHA for bringing up their concerns. But I am confident that we can take care of these differences in conference. Thank you.

Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support. And I would like to the words of the Native Hawaiian Caucus Chair inserted into the record as my own. And I also just want to make a brief comment that this is a work in progress, and that's why I'm supporting it. Because it should continue on in the legislative process. And I do think that during conference, we will be able to work out some of the differences. Thank you.

Okay, Members, returning now to standing committee report number 2020. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered.

Report number 2021, Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition. This bill exempts all positions filled by the Hawaii Tourism Authority within the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism from state civil service laws.

I'm opposed to this because it raises the question, why do we keep underfunding state positions and then exempt the positions so that the various departments or agencies can pay more? I feel we should just modify the job descriptions as well as the pay rates.

And let these state employees receive the full benefits of what it means to be part of a collective bargaining unit. Thank you very much.

Standing Committee report 20. Excuse me, Representative Shimizu on 2021.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. My apologies, but when time permits. Can we go back to SCR 22019, please?

Okay, we can go back now. Standing Committee report number 2019, Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. My apologies again for missing this. In support of this bill with reservations and comments, please proceed. Thank you. My reservations are with the Rebate portion of this bill that transfers a minimum 700,000 and up to $1.5 million into the electric mobility sub account.

With the popularity of these motorized devices, I feel families are making decisions to afford and purchase at this point. We don't need to subsidize them by giving them up to $1,500. So that. That is my reservation. Thank you. Madam Speaker.

Any further discussion on Standing Committee report number 2019? Okay, Members, we're going to be at the top of page 16. Standing Committee report number 2022. Representative Reyes Oda in opposition.

Please proceed.

I'm concerned when the Legislature seeks to substitute its own judgment for that of the regulating commission that's appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The Public Utilities Commission has already placed this issue on their docket to make a decision on the topic. The subject within this bill falls directly within their purview. And as such, we should allow them to fulfill their purpose. I hope that we allow the PUC to resolve their docket before we intervene. Thank you.

Standing Committee Report 2023. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I oppose with comment.

Please proceed.

I want to thank the chairs and the committees for their work on this bill to get it to this point. I believe in the intent of raising monies for our Ina's stewardship, which is unquestionably paramount and needed. What I'm concerned about is our economy's reliance on tourism and reaching a breaking point in our price point.

Competing with worldwide tourist destinations and possibly pricing ourselves out of the market, which would have serious repercussions. It also doesn't help that the increase in the TAT is an unspecified increase amount. And for these reasons, I am opposing this bill. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Lohan. Thank you, Madam Speaker. At the appropriate time, can we go back to Standcom Report 2022?

Yes, let's just finish 2023. Any further discussion? Representative Tam.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support.

Please proceed.

Thank you. I understand the the concern behind this Bill. What I want to emphasize is the defensible constitutionality of the TAT being applied to our cruise ship industry. For the first reason, the definition of TAT is on a furnished room and not a tax on vessels based on the capacity or anything related to tonnage.

Second, the Supreme Court noted that the tonnage clause cannot be read to give preferential treatment to vessels. And by applying the TAT to the cruise ship industry, it puts them on a level playing field with everyone else in the tourism industry. One would argue that not Giving them a tat would mean that they receive preferential treatment.

Finally, it can be argued that the application of the tat onto in this matter will benefit the cruise line industry as they are also in the tourism industry. And the funds that are generated in in this will go towards conservation efforts. That is a major component in our branding for our natural habitat. When it comes to tourism.

The photos of our beaches and natural beauties is used in their promotional advertisements. And the tat and the funds generated from this will go to preserving those the beaches and the natural beauties so they can continue to use it in their advertising. I want to note that we cannot put a price on our natural beauty.

In opposition and permission to insert comments. Thank you.

We have to continue to support it because it is not a partisan issue. We have to continue to ensure that future generations will be able to enjoy Hawaii's natural beauty. Thank you.

Representative Garcia.

So ordered.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, in support. Brief comments, Please proceed. May I have the words of the tourism chair entered into the journals if my own as well? So ordered. Madam Speaker.

Representative Belatti.

As we're looking at the economic turmoil around us, as we're looking at the uncertainties ahead, there are so few revenue generators being considered by this body.

And this is one of them, this is one of them that begins to look at applying some parity across an industry that is part of the extractive industry that sometimes seems to take more than it gives.

And what this bill is doing, and I really commend the chairs who worked on this and so very supportive it is, what this does is it reinvests some of those tax revenues into, into our natural environment, into the beauty of these islands, into the the product that is Hawaii. And so for those reasons, I support this measure.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Kila, Mahalo.

Madam Speaker, in support.

Please proceed.

May I please adopt the words of the tourism chair as this day or my own? So ordered and brief comment.

Madam Speaker, to assess the TAT to cruise ships is probably the most smartest thing that we have done yet if the public was to realize that these ships come into our ports and the money that they pay into the system does not leave and does not benefit anyone. I think folks would be outraged.

The same passengers that are on these cruise ships partake on our roadways, on our trails, on our oceans. But the concerning thing is how they get here. They're traveling thousands of miles across the ocean and at times damaging our ecosystem, damaging our animals in the waterways. And so for us to move forward with maybe a crazy idea.

I think this is a really bold step on trying to level out to what the Tourism Chair has mentioned, that they have gotten this preferential treatment. So the allegations of being an unconstitutional.

Madam Speaker, I would like to refute and I really applaud the Tourism Chair for working to find something creative this session, that the visitors who have constantly come to our state via this passenger vessels will now be partaking and paying their fair tat for us to look forward for ways to protect Hawaii for future generations to come.

So in all those reasons, I stand in strong support.

Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support. Please proceed. I would like the words of the Tourism Chair and the representative from Makiki inserted into the record as my own.

So ordered. Thank you. You represent Shimizu second time.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Still in opposition. And I'd like to acknowledge the words of my colleagues in support of this bill. I agree that the application to cruise ship is very innovative, and I could support that.

The part that I am in opposition to is the just overall increase in the tat tax for reasons that I previously expressed. We are definitely in a difficult situation and money is hard to come by. There's no question about that. And we have to make some difficult decisions.

I stand here in opposition, not to oppose the idea of taking care of our aina, which again is paramount and is fundamental.

So we need to continue the discussion to see where we can make decisions of gaining income and how we can implement these monies that we are going to receive in the most efficient way to achieve those goals. So I appreciate the time. Thank you, Speaker.

Representative Iamoto. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I rise in support and ask that the words of the Chair of Public Safety as well as Tourism and Transportation be entered into the Journal as my own. Thank you.

So ordered. Members, there's no further discussion on 2023. Then we'll go back to standing Committee report 2022. Representative Lohan.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support. And I just wanted to quickly point out that every year that I've been in office, there's been a bill about wheeling. And every year the testimony is, oh, there's ongoing dockets on this and we should not take any action on it.

So that's 13 years. I think it precedes my time here even. So leaving the PUC to their own devices doesn't always work to get things addressed. And furthermore, it's the Legislature's prerogative to set policy, you know, for the PUC to implement.

What this bill includes is intragovernmental wheeling, which basically just means that energy system on one government building would be able to offset utility costs on another government building, not any sales between individuals, et cetera. So yeah, just wanted to clarify. Thanks. And in support.

Okay. Members, we'll be going to standing committee report number 2027. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Rise in opposition. Thank you. This bill seeks to put a time crunch on counties as well as the state to identify important agricultural lands by December 31, 2027. During a committee hearing, it was reported that the state does have quite a bit of land that it also needs to address.

And I hope that we can focus our state resources on helping the various agencies and departments to identify, make those identifications and allow the counties to do their own identification without interference by the Land Use Commission. I do support counties having say over their own lands for their, for their own residents. Thank you very much.

Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition with comments, please. This bill is requiring the counties to take care of their kuleana by 12-31-27, as my colleague pointed out. And if they don't, this bill will task the state LUC, Land Use Commission, to take over the identification and designation of important agricultural lands. This would then put the burden and cost on the state to do this work.

And in order to do and accomplish this work, the State Land Use Commission will have to work together with the counties. So my thought is, why don't we just have them continue to do that right now and accomplish this without having this bill create an additional responsibility, obligation, and even liability for our state government. So although one can look at this bill in a positive way, for the reasons I stated, I oppose. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Okay, Members, we'll turn next to standing committee report 2029. Top of page 70. 2030. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support with a few reservations. This bill basically is, you're hoping to create a working group to amend or revise or update the residential landlord tenant code, which is great. And it correctly identifies that the Judiciary would be a great convener of this work.

I've noticed that there are a few other working groups that we have forwarded the creation of, and oftentimes when they're bringing various parties, stakeholders together, there is an acknowledgement of equity among stakeholders. In this case, it would be landlords kind of versus tenants.

And I just wish that there was language that explicitly ensures that tenants are evenly represented on the working group equal to the numbers of people who are on the working group who do or who have represented landlords, landowners, managers, and realtors. Thank you very much.

Standing committee report 2031. Representative Muraoka. Please proceed.

So this bill is just, it sends the wrong message right away to children. Children who break the law and are not held accountable grow up to be adults who break the law. You know, by taking away the penalty from the minor and their guardians who commit various, you know... Law.

I'm at a loss for words. But they break the law. Yeah. And we're going to have them not held accountable. Let's say that child broke into any one of us in here's vehicle. By taking away the financial ability to pay the restitution to help recover cost of our damage, it sets the wrong standard.

And then by that child will learn the system because children are smart. They'll learn the system. No matter what I do, that's okay. I just got to show up on a weekend and help rake leaves or go to the park and clean the bathroom. It's not... They need to be held accountable for the offenses.

And a lot of these children need to have their parents held accountable as well because their parents are allowing them to do these things. So by taking away this financial penalty, it's really a potion to help breed future criminals. Strong opposition.

Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support. I just want to clarify that this, what currently happens is that children of wealthy families oftentimes are able to meet the debts and restitution. And so they get off without perhaps learning the valuable lesson shared by our colleague.

However, what happens is then that children from lower income families end up becoming turning into adults with this debt hanging over them already. And I just think that it's, there's an unfairness in the reality of how this plays out in the real world. And so for that reason I support this bill. Thank you.

Representative Reyes Oda.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Tam.

Reservations, please.

So ordered. Representative Lamosao.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Garcia.

In opposition. And I'd like to adopt the words of the Rep. from Waianae. Mahalo.

So ordered. Representative Souza.

In support, Madam Speaker. I rise in support of Senate Bill 1028, Senate Draft 1, House Draft 2. Youth fines and fees do not act as a deterrent when it comes to recidivism, and continuing to perpetuate fines and fees for juveniles has no real substantive basis.

There's a law review article in the Emory Law Journal from 2020 titled The Crippling Cost of the Juvenile Justice System: A Legal and Policy Argument for Eliminating Fines and Fees for Youth Offenders by LR Shapiro. This article discusses three legal reasons for eliminating fines and fees and three policy reasons.

The legal reasons include correcting the misapplication of Bearden vs. Georgia from 1983 and its vague holding, which the article states should prompt Congress to implement a bright line criteria for judges to use when determining whether an individual is indigent versus willfully refusing to pay court ordered fines and fees, categorically labeling juveniles as indigent.

Second, under the Eighth Amendment, excessive and fine were not interpreted properly by the United States Supreme Court because of limited historical sources. Therefore, the term excessive should account for the offense, offender's characteristics, and the effect the fine would have on the offender.

Therefore, most fines would be considered excessive for juveniles because they likely would not have the means to pay for these fines and these fines would create debt for them. And third, some state statutes unlawfully include charging fees that are not authorized in the juvenile setting or they exceed statutory maximums.

Eliminating fines and fees altogether would eliminate the need to evaluate statutes state by state to see which fines and fees are unlawful applications of their respective state statutes. Again, these reasons I just stated are described in section three of this law review article.

Three policy reasons the article outlines include, first, the fact that youth fines and fees highlight economic and racial disparities because impoverished youth and youth of color are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. Second, youth fines and fees increase the likelihood of recidivism. And third, they also create hardship on families.

The entire point of having a separate juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate these youth and focus on their development. This was the case from the beginning of the juvenile justice system and its origin in 1899, when the Illinois Legislature passed the Juvenile Court Act.

This act established the first juvenile court in the nation. Fines and fees hinder the progress of these youth and instead create or continue a cycle of debt for them and their families. If there is no rehabilitative value for fines and fees for youth, why continue it?

It's not a tough on crime approach to continue this practice, especially when based on vague arguments not rooted in facts or law. It is having the adverse effect when the justice system is a revolving door for these youth as they enter adulthood. Let's end the cycle and let's end this practice. Thank you.

Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition with brief comment, please. This bill would prohibit... Excuse me. This bill would prohibit the assessment of fines. And I acknowledge the arguments made by my colleagues, and respect those wise statements.

Basically, my understanding is judges that are experienced in their profession have the discretion to assess fees or not to assess fees. And I would like to preserve the judge's prerogative and their expertise to make that decision and not prohibit them from assessing fines. That's my position for opposition. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Amato.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to... In support. I would like to please adopt the words of the Representative from District 25 and District 43 as if they were my own.

So ordered. Representative Holt.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. With reservations. And just like to say in the past couple weeks, I've seen on social media kids getting mobbed at the malls and kids running amok in Ewa Beach on e-bikes. So I think our communities would probably want a little bit more safety than less. Thank you.

Standing Committee Report number 20, 2032. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support with reservations. I hope, this is regarding how we address some of, I think some of our unsheltered neighbors who are struggling with mental health issues, including chronic substance abuse.

I just hope that as we intervene and offer them medical services that's involuntarily, I guess, subjecting them to without their consent, that we have some kind of checks and balances embedded in this bill.

Specifically, I think it's important not just to hand the individual who's in a State of incapacitation to a degree, I think we have to do more than just hand them a phone and say call your attorney. I think we actually need to make sure that they are appointed.

Some kind of advocate, a court-appointed special advocate, guardian, ad litem. Any, somebody, another human being who has a capacity to just monitor what's going on from the moment they are received into this treatment situation. So the moment that they are exited out of treatment. Thank you very much.

Standing Committee Report 2033.

Representative Amato.

Reservations.

With reservations.

So ordered. Top of page 18. Standing Committee Report 2034. Representative Iwamoto.

So ordered. Representative Iwamoto.

Please proceed.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to rise and support with reservations.

Thank you.

This is, this was a very difficult bill to to read, let alone, I'm sure it was very challenging for the committees and for the introducers and everyone connected with this bill. It lists a whole, a lot of very heinous, heinous crimes that people subject children and adults, and people who are vulnerable to.

My concern is that a lot of these heinous, again, really like I wanted to rub. It was so horrible. But a lot of these individual acts are, in and of themselves, they are crimes.

And I just feel like, as somebody who has, you know, I find it challenging to support three-strikes laws or a form of double jeopardy, I feel like these crimes are sufficient standalone crimes to be addressed and to mandate a felony section category A felony or a class A felony or crimes by gathering them all together.

I don't know if justice is served, and if it acts as a deterrent, or if it will make the community safer by putting people in prison for 20 years automatically. Thank you.

Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in strong support of this bill. I am recalling the emotion that I felt when I heard testimony in committee regarding this bill. And this bill is all about protecting our children. And I found it so crazy, so alarming that there is no law right now that defines torture and would protect children.

And this bill is very needed. We need to protect our children. We need to allow law enforcement to have statute that defines and allows them to go after perpetrators. So I thank my colleagues for moving this bill forward. And I look forward to a day when children will not have to experience torture. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

In strong support. I just wanted to say that this bill is not a hypothetical situation; this is a prosecutor's bill that they are seeking to address real grabs that they have experienced with real cases. Once a child is killed through, you know, starvation, dehydration, etc, then it is a crime; before that, it is not.

Representative Marten.

And so they're just trying to address a real gap in our criminal justice system. And it's something that we need. Therefore, I rose in strong support.

Standing Committee Report 2035. Standing Committee Report 2039 Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. SCR 2039, SB 771. I oppose with comment. This is a very interesting bill situation because in our committee hearing there was only one testifier. And that person was from the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, which this bill is for, and they testified against the bill.

I did ask the testifier if their current situation limits or prevents their board from getting high quality and qualified people and the answer was no. I then asked if this bill was necessary and needed and the answer again was no. So with that, I cannot support this bill. And I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Souza.

In support. Brief comment. I just want to correct the record that the testimony from the Hawaii Housing and Finance Development Corporation was actually comment, and it was not in opposition. Thank you.

Standing committee report number 2040. Representative Grandinetti.

With reservations and brief comment, please. I appreciate the intent of the measure to facilitate the production of much needed housing here in Hawaii. My reservations stem from the value I see in county interventions into the 201H project in the Kuilei Place Development.

When the county reviewed the project, they were they added 105 affordable housing units, lowered AMI categories, and extended the period in which units were offered solely to Hawaii residents from 30 days to 60 days. And I really understand that that can result in short term setbacks and delays, having to figure out adjustments to financing.

But I do think in the end those 105 affordable housing, additional affordable housing units are a net gain for our community. But I understand it's a delicate balance. And for those reasons, I'm voting with reservations. Thank you.

Standing committee report... Representative Belatti on 2040.

In support with reservations. For many of the same reasons that the previous speaker expressed reservations, I have those same reservations. In the testimony in the Judiciary Committee from the Department of Planning, from the Department of... Excuse me. Planning and Permitting for the City and County of Honolulu.

They noted that they had a situation, and this may very well be the Kuilei situation, where an applicant requested that the Honolulu City Council impose a condition to change the project in a way that allayed community concerns.

In my district, I have a number of residents throughout the district, different groups concerned with affordable housing that is coming up. And they oftentimes feel like they have no recourse, no way to express their community concerns.

And if the legislative body at the county level is one place that they will be able to do that, this foreclosure of that opportunity raises some serious concerns for me, simply because I am hearing more and more concerns raised by community members and groups. Groups of community members who want to be engaged in the system and feel like their voices are being cut out. So for those reasons, express my very strong reservations as well. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition and ask that the words of the Representatives from Kapahulu and Makiki be entered into the journal as my own.

So ordered. Representative Evslin.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support. I think as we all know, we suffer from a severe lack of workforce housing in Hawaii. 201H-38 exists as a way to try and streamline development and reduce, create a possibility to reduce some of the most common regulatory barriers for workforce housing development.

The current process ensures that there's two layers of discretionary review, both through HHFDC and at the county council level. What this bill does is it just clarifies that that second layer of review at a county level that they cannot impose conditions that will increase the cost of a project by reducing fee waivers or reducing AMI further than what HHFDC had already approved.

The councils do still have the authority to potentially change the design of the project based on community concerns and ultimately to also to reject the project. The intention here is just to try and reduce duplicative discretionary review process with the intention of expediting the development of workforce housing. Thank you.

Top of page 19, Standing Committee report 2041. Representative Iwamoto.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition.

On behalf of many constituents in my district, many of them, I think half of them are condo owners, and they have. They have tried this route laid out in, in the bill regarding alternative dispute resolution. And they just feel that for them, it's more of the same.

And it doesn't. It basically goes against what many condo owners have been seeking to protect themselves as consumers from malfeasance of developers, community managers, and condo associations. I understand that this may go into Conference Committee, and there may be more fine-tuning tuning and I hope it is improved.

But again, on behalf of my constituents, I stand in opposition. Thank you.

Representative Tam.

I stand in support of Senate Bill 146 because it's about providing more options to dispute fines and to collect them. What has happened right now is that many individuals do not know they're being fined, so they racked up many fees along with that fine.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support, brief comments.

Please proceed.

And this opens the door to options. So that there are alternative ways to resolve these issues without bankrupting a condominium owner.

Representative Shimizu.

In our committee hearing, and let me back up.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I oppose with comment.

I thought I would be supporting this bill, but in our committee hearing, the overwhelming testimony opposed this bill, and I personally know some of the testifiers opposing, and they are very reputable and thoroughly involved in their aoaos representing the individual owner's position. So based on their firsthand experiences and their testimony and feedback to me, I'm opposing this bill.

I hope that there will be continued discussions between all stakeholders to find and reach mutually beneficial agreements to resolve their conflicts and improve the condo, condo owners situation. So I appreciate the attempt in this bill to, to go in that direction.

But somehow, the details of the bill are not meeting the needs of the individual condo owners. And we need to look more carefully at that. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Standing Committee Report number 2042 Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

Reservations.

So ordered. Standing Committee Report 2043, Representative Iwamoto.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Reyes Oda.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I missed SCR2042. If you have a moment to go back, I'd like to.

Let's finish 2043, and then we'll go back.

Representative Kila.

Reservations, speaker.

So ordered.

Representative Marten.

I do support the notion of protecting our water source from any sort of leachage from a landfill.

With reservations and brief comments, please.

Please proceed.

However, amendments made of this bill go beyond protecting the water source over the no-pass zone, which the Board of Water Supply is fighting for, to what they call the underground injection control line.

And my understanding from speaking to the parties is the only reason for this is not a reason that is based on environmental needs or environmental concerns. Rather, it's because there is the existence of a GIS map that the Department of Health could look at and determine clearly to respond clearly to a request for a permit.

Whether something is on one side of the line or the other, as opposed to the no-pass zone, which was made in the 80s and does not have a GIS map that the city has identified as their own. Rather, it's a PDF hand-drawn map.

And so for this reason, I think that we do not want to have in perpetuity a law on the books that has real implications for being able to site a landfill on our island based on the existence or not existence of a particular map technology; it should be based on environmental factors.

Thank you.

So ordered. Representative Quinlan.

Representative Amato.

Thank you. With reservations.

In strong support, Madam Speaker.

Please proceed.

I'd just like to note that the underground injection control line marks the border of viable and non-viable fresh water for drinking. Based on the salinity of that water, the Department of Health does have the ability to drill more wells and tests, the line can move over time.

And I think while it may be an imperfect solution, it does give us the ability, it does significantly protect our freshwater drinking supply, which was the original intent of the measure.

Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Regarding SCR2043, SB438. I rise in opposition and comment.

Please proceed.

I support the protection of our drinking water, as the Board of Water testified. I support the protection of our class A soils for agricultural land, as the Hawaii Farmers Union testified in support. But I also can agree with the Department of Health in the city and County of Honolulu.

Who testified in opposition to the bill, stating that there would be no landfill site options with these added restrictions. And would force an illegal expansion of our existing landfill on the west side. I want to be clear. My opposition, my opposition does not erase my support for protecting our water and agricultural lands.

There needs to be continued discussion with the counties to further clarify and confirm accepted landfill sites. It is difficult, as we deliberate and make decisions on bills, to sometimes choose between two priorities. But my hope and desire is to pass bills that would introduce solutions to help solve our problems. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Garcia.

Opposition, and I'd like to adopt the words of the previous speaker as my own.

So ordered. Representative Lee.

Reservations. I'd like to adopt the words of the representative as my own.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Pieirck.

So ordered. Okay, seeing no further discussion on Standing Committee Report 2043, we're going to go back to Standing Committee Report 2042. Representative Shimizu.

I'm opposing this bill based on the opposition testimony provided by the Department of Transportation, the Honolulu and Maui Police Departments. And the county and mayors of Kauai and Maui.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. This is my last time I'm standing with comments. So, thank you, colleagues, for your very kind indulgence to me. I oppose with comments.

As the testimony stated, this bill would introduce some unsafe mindsets and resulting actions regarding crossing streets not within a marked crosswalk. If different counties are allowed different rules, that will be very confusing. There are some good intentions with this bill.

But I believe based on these points and reasons, there are some details that need to be worked out. And therefore I oppose. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Reservations.

Representative Reyes Oda.

So ordered. Okay, Representative Morikawa for the vote.

So ordered. Members, if there's no further discussion on Standing Committee Report 2042, then we'll go to Standing Committee Report 2044. Representative Reyes Oda.

Reservations.

Representative Morikawa for the vote.

Madam Speaker, on the measures before us, all majority Members vote aye with the exception of the following. On page 15, stand com report number 2020, SB 1667, SD 2, HD 3. Rep Amato votes no. Stand com report number 2021, SB 1571, SD 2, HD 3. The following vote no, Amato, Iwamoto.

On page 16, stand com report number 2022, SB 589, SD 1, HD 3. Rep Kong votes no. Stand com report number 2023, SB 1396, SD 3, HD 3. Rep Kong votes no. Stand com report number 2027, SB 1099, HD 1. Rep Iwamoto votes no. On page 17, stand com report number 2031, SB 1028, SD 1, HD 2.

Following vote no, Kila, Kong. On page 18, stand com report number 2039, SB 771, HD 1. Following vote no, Amato, Iwamoto. For stand com report number 2040, SB 38, SD 2, HD 2. The following vote no. Amato, Iwamoto, Kong, Marten, Olds, Perruso, Poepoe.

On page 19, stand com report number 2041, SB 146, SD 1, HD 2. Rep Iwamoto votes no. Stand com report number 2042, SB 106, SD 1, HD 2. Following vote no, Chun, Garrett, Holt, Kong, Lamosao, Miyake. For stand com report number 2043, SB 438, SD 2, HD 3. Rep Kong votes no.

Representative Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, all minority Members vote aye with the exception of the following. On page 15, SCR 2018, SB 903, SD 2, HD 2. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Matsumoto, Muraoka, Shimizu, Reyes Oda, and Pierick vote no. SCR 2019, SB 1117, SD 2, HD 2. Rep Pierick votes no. SCR 2020, SB 1667, SD 2, HD 3. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Muraoka, and Souza vote no.

SCR 2021, SB 1571, SD 2, HD 3. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Matsumoto, Muraoka, Shimizu, Reyes Oda, and Pierick vote no. Page 16, SCR 2022, SB 589, SD 1, HD 3. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Reyes Oda votes no. SCR 2023, SB 1396, SD 3, HD 3. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Matsumoto, Muraoka, Shimizu, Reyes Oda, and Pierick vote no. SCR 2027, Senate Bill 1099, House Draft 1. Reps Shimizu and Pierick vote no. SCR 2029, SB 321, SD 1, HD 2. Garcia votes no.

Page 17, SCR 2030, Senate Bill 822, SD 2, HD 2. Reps Garcia and Muraoka vote no. SCR 2031, SB 1028, SD 1, HD 2. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Matsumoto, Muraoka, Shimizu, and Pierick vote no. SCR 2033, Senate Bill 1429, SD 2, HD 3. Reps Alcos and Garcia vote no. Page 18, SCR 2039, SB 771, House Draft 1. Reps Garcia, Muraoka, Shimizu, and Pierick vote no. SCR 2040, Senate Bill 38, SD 2, HD 2. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Muraoka vote no.

Page 19, SCR 2041, Senate Bill 146, SD 1, HD 2. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Muraoka, Shimizu, and Pierick vote no. SCR 2042, Senate Bill 106, SD 1, HD 2. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Matsumoto, Shimizu, and Souza vote no. SCR 2043, SB 438, SD 2, HD 3. Reps Alcos, Garcia, Muraoka, and Shimizu vote no. SCR 2044, Senate Bill 532, SD 2, HD 2. Garcia votes no.

Members, have all votes been cast? Representative Hussey.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On standing committee report 2018, I made earlier spoken comments in opposition, but I'd like to change that to a WR and request to add written remarks to the journal.

So ordered. Said Senate bills pass third reading. Okay, Members, we're at the top of page 20. Representative Todd.

Madam Speaker, I move that the Senate bills listed on page 20 pass third reading.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, second the motion.

Any discussion on these items beginning with Senate Bill number 1470? Senate Bill 382. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Senate Bill 933. Senate Bill 1465. Representative Morikawa for the vote.

Madam Speaker, on the measures before us, all majority Members vote aye.

Representative Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, all minority Members vote aye with the exception of the following. On SCR 1940, Senate Bill 1470. Rep Garcia votes no. SCR 1943, Senate Bill 382, HD 1. Garcia votes no. SCR 1945, Senate Bill 933, SD 2, HD 1. Reps Garcia and Muraoka vote no. SCR 1947, Senate Bill 1465, SD 1, HD 1. Reps Garcia, Muraoka, and Shimizu vote no.

Have all votes been cast? Said Senate bills pass third reading. Members, we're on item number seven, announcements. Representative Matsumoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Just a reminder to all the Members that we have the Women's Legislative Caucus Easter basket drive on Friday. That's going to be immediately following our session up in the Rotunda. So if you can bring your baskets on that day.

And also everybody received on your desk the ballot for for the Easter Bunny. So if you can fill that out and get it into this basket in the next 15 minutes, we'll be tallying that up and you will see who the bunny is on Friday. Thank you very much.

Members, any further announcements? Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'd like to thank Representative from Mililani for putting my name on this ballot. And I'd also like to promote my colleague from the Big Island as a great Easter Bunny. Thank you.

Seeing no further announcements. For the motion to adjourn, Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I move that this House stand adjourned until 12 o'clock noon Thursday.

Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The motion is carried. The House stands adjourned until 12 o'clock noon Thursday.