House Floor

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

[Roll Call]

Item number two, reading of the journal.

Madam speaker, point of clarification.

Representative Ilagan.

Is Representative Kila not present or excused?

At this point, he is not present and we will be doing a two-tiered thing. So, for now, you're either present or not present. Whether you are excused or unexcused will depend on whether you submitted the form and followed the policies that we've outlined.

Thank you.

Thanks for asking that question. 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?

Madam speaker, there are none.

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

Madam speaker, there are none.

Introductions. Members, are there any introductions? Representative Hartsfield.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam speaker and members of the House, I am relieved and excited to introduce three of my office staff. Please stand. Nathan Isaias, my Office Manager, Selena Reyes is my Legislative analyst, and Jacqueline Andrade is a Legislative Aide. So, please welcome them to the House of Representatives. Mahalo.

Representative Kapela.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have a very special and sparkly introduction in the gallery today. Joining us is our current Miss Hawaii Volunteer, 2026, Lesina Matatumua-Vermeulen. She is a 20-year-old pre nursing student at Kapiolani Community College, and her platform is diabetes in Polynesia.

She will be representing the State of Hawaii at the Miss Volunteer America Competition in June with the finals happening on June 20th. We also have our Miss Hawaii Teen Volunteer, 2026, Aria Chalk. Her platform is more than a stage, focusing on musical theater. She is a 14-year-old 8th grader at Stevenson Middle.

Joining them is their two directors, the directors of the Miss Hawaii and Miss Hawaii Teen Volunteer Program, Larry Nakano and Tony Alcociba. They are also my pageant papas. Please join me in welcoming them. Welcome to your miss—hi, welcome to Miss Hawaii, welcome to the Hawaii State House of Representatives.

Representative La Chica.

Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members. In the gallery, I see a good friend and advocate, Mark Alexander, Executive Director of the Hawaii Medical Association. And please stand and be recognized. And formerly also Executive Director for City and County of Honolulu's Office of Housing. Welcome to your House of Representatives.

Representative Keohokapu-Lee Loy.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In the gallery today, we have a very special constituent from the Big Island. He is the President of the Hawaii Association of Broadcasters and my nephew, Chris Leonard.

Any others? Recess, subject to the call of the Chair.

Will the House come to order? Item number five.

Madam Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege of the House. Madam Speaker, pursuant to Section 226, Mason's Legislative Manual, I rise to this question of a privilege of the House concerning conduct of officers or employees of the House.

On January 20, 2026, Members of this House presented both the Speaker and Mr. Reese Nakamura a memo requesting in writing, at least 72 hours in advance, the answer to two questions related to a petition that had been presented to the House pursuant to House Rule 46.2. These questions were or are, when will the petition be presented to the House pursuant to House Rule 46.2?

And two, what are the procedures and rules that apply to the deliberation and decision making by the entire House on the petition and its request for the House to conduct a limited investigation into the conduct of the legislator who accepted $35,000?

Madam Speaker, you nor Mr. Nakamura have provided us in writing, and I would ask, as a matter of privilege of the House, when we can expect that this memo will be provided to all Members of the House so we can deal with the serious matter that is being presented to the body with respect to the legislator who accepted $35,000 in 2022?

Thank you, Representative Belatti. A draft letter has been written and a letter will be sent to all signatories of that of that letter by the end of today.

Madam Speaker, further question of privilege for the House. I hope that... I hope, and I request that that draft include commentary on how we may be able to proceed with the petition in light of any other measures that are taken up by this House.

We will... The draft letter will... The final letter will include responses to the two questions addressed in the letter. Thank you. Moving on to item number five, introduction of resolutions. Mr. Clerk, are there any resolutions for action?

Yes, Madam Speaker. House Resolution number eight, urging the Department of the Attorney General to prioritize and expedite the state investigation into the alleged acceptance of approximately $35,000 by a state legislator in January 2022. This resolution is offered by you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Kahaloa.

Madam Speaker, I move to adopt House Resolution number eight.

Representative Matsumoto.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any discussion? Representative Tarnas.

Thank you. Madam Speaker. I speak in strong support of the resolution. As your Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee Chair, I am keenly aware of the pressures that are being expressed by the public and the outrage that people have for the alleged acceptance of approximately $35,000 by a state legislator in January of 2022.

I am personally outraged by any illegal conduct by our colleagues in the House or Senate. It reflects poorly on all of us and it does cast a cloud of suspicion over this chamber and the other chamber. We do need to have this addressed as quickly as possible.

I believe that the Attorney General, now that she has been given the opportunity by the U.S. attorney to investigate this incident, that they will follow proper procedure and be able to come to a conclusion and make a determination if this was in fact an illegal offense, and then follow through with the proper steps to bring this person to justice.

I would like that done as quickly as possible. I also want to make sure that anything we do here at the Legislature does not impede or undermine that investigation. The Attorney General and her team are fully equipped and they have the expertise to do the investigation properly. They have the authority to follow through if it was in fact an illegal activity with indictments and do the investigation and the prosecution. This body does not have all of those powers and authorities.

We can investigate our own Members and discipline our own Members, but we don't have the authority that the Attorney General has to follow through in the full process. So I think this resolution is the appropriate path forward where we are expressing our very strong opinion that the Attorney General move as quickly as possible.

Do the investigation, alert us when it's appropriate, when whether this individual is a sitting legislator, and do it in writing, provide us this information because the public wants to know, we want to know as quickly as possible. So I think this resolution and the approach recommended here is the appropriate one. And I urge Members here to support the resolution. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support of this motion. However, this resolution, however, I do have reservations that I'd like to share at this time.

Please proceed.

Thank you. This resolution as it's currently written, because it is contained on its own, I feel may give the public the impression that we, as a Legislature, as a separate branch of government, are not addressing or not owning our power to investigate this matter. I believe the laws do state that we have the power to investigate current Members and past Members, including the gentleman identified in the resolution to ask questions. And so my reservations are that it doesn't go far enough.

It doesn't set a very strong timeline. The resolutions currently says as soon as possible, that as soon as possible could be, you know, a year from now. I would have preferred that it actually understanding having not seen all the other amendments to the resolution. It would have been also interesting to - had there been a very specific timeline, about in two weeks. Let us know in two weeks if this person wasn't a sitting Member. Thank you very much.

Any further discussion? Representative Matayoshi.

Thank you. In support. I'd just like to adopt the words of the Chair.

So ordered. Representative Kahaloa. Oh, excuse me, Members. We will be taking a voice vote. All those in favor say aAe.

Excuse me. Privilege of the.

Representative Belatti.

Would just like to recognize that I had stood up and I believe the representative from Kapolei may also have been rising to stand to speak.

Oh, I'm sorry. I did not see you. Representative Belatti.

Thank you, Speaker. In support, with reservations. Madam speaker. Like the speaker before me, I don't think that this resolution goes far enough. And as someone who had had the opportunity to offer some input in the deliberative process that happened outside of the Committee process, one of the things that I think we needed to do in this resolution is to be more specific about the request for the Attorney General to expedite the state investigation and have proposed that we have specific and short timelines for the Department to provide a preliminary report of their findings that have impact on the steps that the House should and has the authority to take under the Constitution under our House Revised Statute or Hawaii Revised Statutes, as well as under Mason's Legislative Manual.

This preliminary report could and should include answers to the questions of whether the lawmaker who accepted the $35,000 is a current lawmaker and whether the lawmaker who accepted the $35,000 is employed by the state in the Executive Branch.

There's precedence in receiving a preliminary report on the status of an ongoing investigation, as was demonstrated by Attorney General Marjorie Bronster, who provided a preliminary report to Governor Ben Cayetano on August 29, 1997 when the AG was then directed to investigate various allegations involving the trustees of the Kamehameha School's Bishop Estate.

This preliminary report was provided 17 days after the Governor directed the AG to investigate those allegations. It is entirely reasonable and plausible for the Attorney General here to be able to answer these questions within days, if not one week, in order for this House to be able to move more thoughtfully through its own process to consider what, if any, investigations should be conducted under our own authorities as an equal branch of government.

In rebuttal, because I don't know what quite what the rules are for this debate, I would also like to say that under our rules, we do have the authority to subpoena. There are punishments such as contempt, there are punishments to be held. And in fact we can direct the Attorney General to help us conduct those legislative investigations. Finally, to the point whether or not we can even police former legislators.

Madam Speaker, in Mason's Legislative Manual 564 Investigation of Charges Against Members, point 2 states specifically when a charge of bribery, corruption or misconduct - which the taking of these $35,000 falls under any of those three categories - is made against Members of a House, the House has the power to investigate the charge and to summon the person making the charge before its bar.

Mason's allows for us to investigate former Members of this House and Madam Speaker, my apologies if I may insert at the right time the proper citation to Mason's, but we do in fact have Mason's authorities that allow us to investigate former Members and former Legislators. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am in support, with reservations. And I would like to have the words of the representatives from A Kiki and Kakaako inserted into the journal as my own.

Thank you. For those who don't know, or maybe for those who do.

So ordered.

Myself and the representative from Makiki have been working on this matter since May of 2025. We spent the entire interim looking into this. We know the legal aspects of the situation like the back of our hand. We know the facts of the situation like the back of our hand. We know what we've done.

We know the work that we've put in in order to do two things, have the Attorney General look into this matter and investigate under her investigative powers under the Hawaii Revised Statutes.

And second, for the Legislature to do an investigation ourselves here in the legislative branch under our powers under Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 21, which allows the House or the Senate to form an investigative Committee and to investigate matters such as these.

And also reiterating the powers that Mason's rules also allow us to do here in the Legislature, I do agree with the Judiciary Chair that the AG is fully equipped to do a criminal investigation. That's her job under the Hoya Valley statutes. And that's wonderful. We should allow her to do that.

That's why I'm in support of this resolution. She should give us her findings. However, we are the legislative branch. We have powers as the Legislature to police our own. We have the authority to do so under the Hawai' I statutes and it's been done before. We formed investigative committees and we do have the power to subpoena.

We do have the power to look into matters such as these because it's our responsibility it's our duty and it's our obligation. And the public deserves that transparency. We can have open hearings. That's one thing that the Attorney General's office cannot do. It's a closed hearing or it's a closed investigation on her end.

So I do want to stress the fact that we have our own obligations, we have our own authority, and we need to focus on figuring this out because it could be a sitting Member of the Legislature and.

And that does impede and hinder on the transparency, and it does taint the legislative process that we are all engaged in. Every time we sit in a hearing, every time a bill moves, we do not know if it's a current Member of the Legislature.

And so we need to understand if this is a criminal act, etc, and we can do that by forming our own investigative Committee and doing the work ourselves. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would also like to asked to insert written comments into the journal in addition to my words.

So ordered. Thank you, Representative Garrett.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Rising in support. Please proceed. Thank you. Few issues strike more deeply public trust than the appearance of corruption. The unresolved questions surrounding the $35,000 transaction involving an unidentified legislator have understandably unsettled the public and raised questions about accountability. On that point, there is no real disagreement in this chamber.

The people of Hawaii deserve confidence that the law applies equally to everyone, without fear or favor. I also want to acknowledge the role that engaged citizens, advocates and commentators have played in keeping this issue from being ignored. Civic engagement is not an inconvenience to democracy. It is its lifeblood.

The fact that this issue reigns before us today is in part because people demanded answers. That matters, and it should be said out loud. The question before us now, however, is not whether accountability matters. Of course it does.

The question is how best we achieve it in a way that is credible, fair, and consistent with the constitutional roles we each serve. Madam speaker, many of us previously called for an independent review of this matter, and thankfully, that review is now underway.

The Attorney General has agreed to investigate this transaction, relying on materials already gathered by federal authorities. That is a significant development. It reflects the very independence many of us called for. An investigation removed from legislative politics, conducted by an office with the authority, tools and responsibility to determine whether any laws were violated. This resolution recognizes that moment.

It does not prejudge facts. It does not declare outcomes. It does not interfere with the investigation. Instead, it urges the Attorney General to proceed expeditiously and responsibly, recognizing both the urgency of public concern and the importance of due process.

We have heard arguments that the Legislature should do more, that we should conduct our own inquiry alongside the Attorney General's investigation, or that failing to do so amounts to abdication of responsibility. Madam Speaker, I understand that instinct. It comes from a sincere desire for transparency and accountability. But I respectfully disagree with that conclusion.

Legislative investigations and criminal investigations serve different purposes, but they are not hermetically sealed from one another. Parallel proceedings risk witness confusion, inconsistent public statements, and the appearance or reality of political pressure on an active investigation. Even when intentions are pure, the outcome can undermine the very confidence we are trying to restore.

Restraint in this context is not passivity. It is institutional discipline. Institutions earn public trust not by acting on every impulse, but by being clear on their limits and deliberate on how they exercise power. The separation of powers does not require each branch to act at all times on all fronts.

Sometimes it requires knowing when not to act, when stepping back preserves the integrity of a process better than stepping forward. Respecting the independence of an ongoing investigation is not surrendering authority again, it is exercising judgment.

It has also been suggested that the Legislature should act because the Attorney General's investigation will proceed in secrecy and that only a legislative inquiry can satisfy the public's right to know. Secrecy during an investigation is not a flaw. It is a safeguard. It protects evidence, witnesses, and the rights of individuals until facts are established.

Transparency comes at the conclusion of the process, not before it. Supporting an independent investigation does not mean that the Legislature is finished with its work. It means that we are sequencing the work responsibly.

In fact, our most important role may come next, asking what lessons this episode reveals and whether reforms are needed to ensure we are not placed in this position again. Madam speaker, are our campaign finance laws sufficiently clear? Do disclosure requirements keep pace with modern fundraising practices?

Are statutes of limitation appropriate for complex corruption cases, and are there structural gaps that allow uncertainty and delay to erode public trust? Those are forward looking questions. They are squarely within our authority, and addressing them strengthens accountability far more than duplicating an investigation already underway. Madam speaker, this resolution does not foreclose future action.

It does not waive legislative authority, and it does not dismiss public concern. It simply affirms that at this moment, the best path to accountability is an independent investigation conducted without political interference and conducted with urgency. Madam speaker, public trust is not rebuilt through overlapping inquiries or performative action.

It is rebuilt when institutions understand their role, respect one another's boundaries, and commit to reform where reform is warranted. By supporting this resolution, we're sending a clear message. Accountability matters. Independence Matters and judgment matters. For these reasons, I urge everyone supported this resolution. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Belatti, for the second time.

Second time. And I will. I will wrap it up here. Madam Speaker, I just wanted to stand up in support again with reservations. I agree with what the speaker from Manoa has said.

What I disagree with and what I think needs to happen is that we need to be to request that this be done more expeditiously and that there be more time certain. Because then we can in fact, as the speaker before me said, act within our boundaries, act independently and act with integrity.

Madam Speaker, I would point to Section 796 of Mason's Legislative Manual, Investigations Respecting Members. This is the provision that says either house of the Legislature has the power to investigate and institute an inquiry into the truth of an alleged bribery of any of its Members or the Members of a previous Legislature connected with its legislative functions.

When we look at these rules clearly, we do have the ability to conduct a legislative investigation that will satisfy and believe our duties under the. Under the Constitution. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Vice Speaker Ichiyama.

Speaker, I rise in support. May I have the words of the. Chair of Judiciary and the Chair of Higher Education into the Journal as if they were my own.

So ordered.

Thank you.

Representative Matsumoto.

Speaker, I stand in support. Please proceed. Permission to insert comments into the Journal.

So ordered. Representative Garcia.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Quinlan. Representative Cochran.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Same request. Enter the Journal.

Thank you so much. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Same request.

So ordered. Representative Hussey.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Alcos.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Quinlan.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support.

Please proceed.

I'd like to have the words of the Representative from Manoa and the Chair of the Judiciary entered into the Journal as if they were my own. And some brief comments.

Please proceed.

Quis custodiet ipsos cot custodes. That means who watches the watchers? Now, those words were written 2,000 years ago, but I think they've been central to every government before or since. Sadly, two of our own have been convicted and sentenced for wrongdoing, and it seems that another of our own may be suspected of the same.

Public trust has been broken and we need a pathway forward. I really want to thank all of the Members today for this, I thought, was a very robust and public and transparent discussion and a discussion that we needed to have in full view.

I want to thank you specifically, Madam speaker, for pushing so diligently over the past few months for the Attorney General and the appropriate law enforcement authorities to investigate this matter to its conclusion.

I'd also like to say that regardless of what may be happening on the mainland or in other places around the world, the House of Representatives respects process and we will always cooperate fully with law enforcement. I want to thank the Attorney General's office for giving this matter their full attention. We ask for a speedy resolution.

The People demands Justice.

Madam Speaker. Second time.

Members.

Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I just want to point out, to respect the comments of my colleague who just spoke. I do want to point out, too, that throughout this process, the Attorney General has changed course.

And so on January 7, 2026 Attorney General, the State of Hawaii announced in a press release that the Attorney General and the United States Attorney's office agreed that a parallel state investigation regarding the $35,000 payment recipient would interfere with the ongoing federal investigation.

Then, on January 14, and the timeline coincides with the letters that myself, the representative from Makiki and several other representatives submitted to the U.S. attorney and to the Governor of the State of Hawaii, inquiring further into the situation thereafter.

On January 14, 2026 representative, the representative from Waikiki, myself and several other representatives, like I mentioned, wrote to Governor Josh Green and wrote to the U.S. attorney.

And then thereafter, on January 14th, we ended up actually, excuse me, there was a reversal from the attorney General on January 20, where the attorney General reversed course and announced in a press release that its office has initiated an investigation regarding the $35,000 payment following an agreement by federal authorities to share evidence.

Now, I want to point out that already this raised red flags for me because the initial reason for not wanting to conduct the investigation had to do with the fact that the Attorney General's office and the US Attorney thought that a parallel investigation would be. Would hinder the progress of the ongoing federal investigation.

However, when the Attorney General announced thereafter on January 20, she talks about the sharing of evidence. That's a totally different reason. That's a totally different situation. And, and that was never mentioned prior, that it was an evidentiary issue that the U.S. attorney was not going to share evidence. It was about not having a parallel state investigation.

So the bottom line is this is why the Legislature needs to investigate, because we already saw a reversal, of course, from the Attorney General. And that further proves why we need to take action here. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Iligan.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in strong support.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I definitely want to thank you for this resolution. One of the things I really want to highlight Is a be it resolved.

One of the bea resolve is that the Department of the AG is requested to confirm and notify the Legislature in writing as soon as possible that the legislator who allegedly accepted the 35,000 is not a current Member of the 33rd Legislature.

The reason why I think this is very important, Madam speaker, is that right now the public is pointing fingers at this body. In this body. I have known the Members here and I know they live with integrity.

And if the AG can expedite and really take some action on that point so this body can be shown to the public that we live by integrity. Madam speaker, thank you for this resolution. And I hope the AG will do us justice and and reveal that it's not a Member of this body. Thank you.

Members. We will be taking a voice vote. All those in favor say Aye. All those opposed say no. House Resolution number eight is adopted. Mr. Clerk, are there any other resolutions for action?

Madam speaker, there are no further resolutions for action. May rise to a question of privilege.

So ordered.

Rise to a question Privilege of the House.

Representative Souza.

Madam Speaker, I introduced the other resolution. Well, one of the two other resolutions that are on the order of the day today. House Resolution number nine. And it is in line with the same substantive content as House Resolution number eight.

And I just want to put on the record that we took action on House Resolution number eight. House Resolution number nine looks like it's going to be referred to Committee. Where we don't know what's going to happen at that point.

But I just want to put on the record that my resolution had to do with urging the House of Representatives to investigate or to form an investigative Committee under our statutory Authority under Chapter 21 Hawaii Revised Statutes and to investigate the unknown state legislator. Thank you.

Moving on to item number six, announcements. Members, are there any announcements? Seeing none. Representative Morikawa for adjournment.

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

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 noon, Monday. It.