House Standing Committee on Transportation

Morning good meaning Thursday, February 5th Transportation Committee hearing here in conference room 4:30 at 9:30am in the Hawaii State Legislature. I have Vice Chair Miyake with me here today and myself and we have a longer than normal agenda. We have this agenda plus decision making from last Tuesday's agenda for decision making.

So in the purpose of time if need be, I just want to ask that if folks can please keep your comments to the 2 minute time limit. I don't like to cut folks off, but if I need to I will.

And before I go over the script, I do want to apologize for the technical difficulties of uploading public testimony just for yesterday's hearing. We're working through the kinks and we are doing everything we possibly can.

So I apologize if there was a mishap on our side and for the public and as we have to adjourn before floor session. If opportunity for testifiers does not proceed itself, please know that written testimonies were taken forth for the Committee. Folks on Zoom, keep yourself muted and the video off while waiting to testify.

The Zoom chat function is for folks with technical issues. Please use it for that only. Disconnect unexpectedly, you may attempt to rejoin the meeting if you're disconnected. In the event of a network failure, we may need to reschedule and appropriate notices will be posted for decision making. Please avoid using trademark or copyrighted images.

Refrain from profanity on civil behavior, such behaviors for grounds removal from hearing and if I could just ask if you're testifying in person, please address the Committee. I know we can get passionate at the stand, but it's not your soapbox. Please address the Committee and we will need to adjourn before floor. I said that. Okay, noting that.

Thank you folks so much. Let's get started with our first agenda item before us HB2393 Lane taxation establishes alternative transportation options tax credit for employers that offer transportation demand management strategies to employees who commute using a method other than single occupancy vehicles. Authorizes rulemaking by shermiake for testimony .

Department Of Taxation with comments

Department of Taxation. Stands on its written testimony with comments.

Thank you Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization and Support. Tax foundation of Hawaii with comments on Zoom.

The Tax foundation stands on on its comments. Mahalo.

Thank you and one individual in support. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify on HB2392? Thank you Director. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify?

Thank you Members. Any questions? Seeing then move on to our next agenda item before us. HB2462 relating to consumer protection Prohibits auto manufacturers and dealers from charging a post sale subscription fee for hardware that is already installed at the time of purchase. Establishes penalties and fines. Vice Chair for testimony

Alliance for Automotive Innovation in opposition on Zoom. Okay thank you. Thank you. DCCA in support.

We stand on our written testimony in support.

Thank you. And one individual in support. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify on HB2462. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify HB2462 to see that check.

Thank you Members. Any questions? Seeing none Move on to our next agenda item before us.

HB 2423, relating to biodiesel. Requires the Department Director of Business Economic Development and Tourism to adopt rules to require that diesel fuel sold in the state use for use in on highway diesel powered motor vehicles contain no less than 5% biodiesel by volume. Vice Chair for testimony.

Hawaii State Energy Office with comments.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Manasseh Chando for the Hawaii State Energy Office and we stand on our written testimony providing comments.

Thank you. Hawaii Farm Bureau with comments. Pacific Biodiesel in support.

Chair Kila, Vice Chair Miyake, thanks for having me today. This is a really important Bill for us. We're, we've—are running right now our biodiesel plant on the Big Island at less than capacity, about 60% right now. We'd like to get back to full capacity to keep economically viable.

So, with the lack of federal credits, this is the states are, you know, once, again, are stepping in to handle some things and we'd like to do this. It doesn't cost the state anything.

It should cost the trucking industry—the main user of diesel fuel—just a few pennies a gallon and 5% is a very modest amount to get, to get in there, but it's a big deal for, for our company and, and it shows support for the state that, you know, the state that kind of invented biodiesel is finally going to put biodiesel into all of our on road.

All engine manufacturers are accepted. It's diesel fuel. It's under the diesel fuel spec at 5%, so there's no issue with anybody, so, I would like to keep it at just this small 5% and get started with that. Appreciate your support. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii Transportation Association in support.

Aloha. We stand in support of our testimony with the intent and only going up to 5%.

Thank you. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 2423? Vice Chair.

Mr. King, I have a question. Do you folks export biodiesel by chance?

No.

Everything's local?

Everything stays in Hawaii.

Okay, thank you. I was just quick curious. Members, any other questions? Seeing none. We'll move on to our next agenda item before us.

HB 1771 related to carbon offsets requires the Department of Transportation to assist and enable a person to voluntary purchase a verified carbon offset for greenhouse gas emissions returning from the person's air travel to or from the airport in the state. Vice Chair for testimony.

Life of the land with comments. 350 Hawaii.

Aloha Chair and Vice Chair. Henry Curtis, Executive Director of Life of the Land. We've been in 10 bioenergy proceedings at the PUC. We have the Hawaii Supreme Court victories on climate change. Carbon offsets are for the most part globally a scam. Some of them are real, but most of them are a scam.

If a state agency lists entities that are involved in carbon offsets, that can be problematic. If there is not mechanisms to remove companies that are not valid, there needs to be a public mechanism. Otherwise the state could be liable. Aloha. Thank you.

Thank you. 350 Hawaii in opposition, Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines with commentary.

Chair we will stand on our testimony with written comments and we are available if you have any questions. Mahalo.

Thank you. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify on HB 1771?

Director Sniffen I'm sorry, I have a question. I know you didn't submit testimony. Are there other states that have a similar program to this? I think California has carbon offset program. But they run it through their dot. Through the dot. Do you know what agency by chance?

I don't know. I don't know which agency. I don't know any state that has a program that's run through the DOT for something like this.

He would let me know.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Members, any other questions? Seeing none, move on to our next agenda item before us.

HB 2081, related to commercial driver's licensing. Requires that the state and county firefighters exempt from commercial driver's licensure be subject to an alcohol and substance abuse policy for employees that is equivalent to or exceeds the provisions of the Safety and Health Standards. Establishes—established—by United States Department of Transportation for holders of commercial driver's license.

Vice Chair for the testimony, please.

Department of Human Resources Development, in spport.

Chair, Vice Chair, Representative Evslin. We stand on written testimony. Thank you.

Thank you. Department of Transportation, in support. Thank you, Director. City and County of Honolulu, Department of Human Resources, in support.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Nolan Yasaki, Department Director, the City and County Department of Human Resources Council, testimony in support.

Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii County Mayor's Office in support. County of Kauai in support. Honolulu Fire Department in support. County of Maui Fire Chief in support. Hawaii Firefighters Association in opposition. Maui Fire Department in support. And one individual, Sheldon Howe, in support, on zoom. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 2081?

Thank you, Members. Any questions? Seeing none, Members move to the next agenda item before us. HB2334 related to transportation environmental review. Authorizes the Department of Transportation to assume responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for highway projects as well as railroad, public transportation, or multimodal projects within the state.

Allowing streamlined environmental reviews provides a limited waiver of sovereign immunity to comply with Federal requirements under 2023, United States Chapter 326, and 327. Vice Chair Miyake for the testimony.

Department of Transportation in support.

Chair Vice Chair and Members. Department stands on its testimony in support.

Thank you. And one individual in support. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB2334? Seeing none Chair.

Thank you, Director Sniffen. I have a question. I know this is a fairly new concept, but are there other states that are already?

There's 12 other states that are already have NEPA assignment.

And they've been able to, from my understanding, just to help us get projects out quicker.

Absolutely. What they found is that under NEPA assignment, they follow the same federal regulations, but they're able to get their projects out in half the time.

Okay. Thank you, Director Sniffen. Members, any other questions? Seeing none, we'll move on to our next agenda item before us relating to federal military installations.

Authorize the Department of Transportation to enter to agreements United States Department of Defense for the provision of services as federal military installations provided only federal funds are used in Title 23, United States Code. Federal highway funds are excluded. Authorizes charging and administrative fee. Vice Chair Miyake for testimony.

Department of Transportation in support. Thank you. Hawaii Emergency Management Agency in support. Military and Community Relations Office, under DBEDT, in support. Hawaii Military Affairs Council in support. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 2336?

Thank you. Director Sniffen. You know, for this one, with the charging the administrative fee, is that the legal workaround to do cost recuperation?

Exactly. So, right now, we set it about 10%.

Because they technically are exempt from local localities and taxes.

Not that they're exempt because we treat, they're treat—we're treated as their local partner now. And because, because we're their local partner, instead of going in with just a time and materials cost, they're giving us a percentage of the project cost. That's probably going to come out higher than the time of materials and better for us.

So, do you operate as a general then in that nexus?

In general, we're the prime consultant and then we're the general contractor. In general, we'll follow our same procurement requirements for the state to get their projects done.

But they would procure you technically?

No. So, we just go in with an IGSA with them or intergovernmental agreement. Once that agreement is set, we are allowed to operate as their, their contractor.

Okay, good to know. Members, any other questions? Thanks, Director. Okay, seeing none. Let's move with our next agenda item before us, HB 1666 relating to motor vehicles perfects or sale or offers of sale. New motor vehicle markups in excess of 5% of the manufacturer. Suggested retail part markups in excess of $0.

When specifying a proclamation declaring state of emergency charges to added to rates not based underwriting risky credit characteristics or the consumer when dealers directly finance motor vehicle purchases requires dealers to retain records or markups for a period of no less than three years. Vice chair for the testimony.

Windward Auto Group in opposition. Kuhio Auto Group in opposition. Hawaii Automobile Dealers Association in opposition.

Aloha. My name is Melissa Pavlicek. I'm here today on behalf of the Hawaii Automobiles Association. We represent 71 new car dealers here in Hawaii. We respectfully oppose this measure. The value of dealers in Hawaii is really to be the interface between the manufacturer and our Hawaii consumers.

The dealers, the 71 dealers are our neighbors, brothers, cousins, aunties, uncles. And we have over 4,000 employees here in Hawaii. This Bill would significantly risk the operations and sustainability of our dealerships. And we ask that you please defer it. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Servco Pacific in opposition. Ohana Automotive Group in opposition. Soderholm Sales and Leasing in opposition.

Senator Kila and Members. I'm Erik Soderholm. I submitted written testimony, but I came down here, so I figured just give a couple minutes, you know. So our company's been around for 40 years. I'm Vice President, part owner. My wife is the majority owner, but she sent me down here, so.

The majority owner? Yeah?

Yeah yeah, so the thing is that we're a small dealer. We're in Hata. I'm not speaking for Hatta. Hatta just made their presentation. I'm the lone wolf, you know, so you can beat me down, you know, and but this would be very detrimental to us. We have a lot of manufacturers that don't have MSRPs.

Not every manufacturer has an MSRP. And we have to sell over MSRP because of the costs associated with doing business in Hawaii. And so people look at me and they think like, oh, you look like you're from Ohio. And I say, well, I'm from a little town south of Cleveland. And they say, where's that?

And I said, Kailua. And they said, oh, so you're like a local haole boy? And I said, yeah, that's my brother and I and three others. So the thing is that this is our home. My kids are in the second generation. We're going to the second generation.

Many of my members, there's 50 Members in Hatta, but there's another. Maybe over another 50 to 60 other members, other guys, motor vehicle dealers in Hawaii that aren't in Hatta that sell, you know, commercial vehicles and whatever and sell some consumer vehicles.

I understand this is a consumer vehicle thing, so I'd really appreciate if you guys wouldn't go forward on this because it would be very detrimental to us. And that's my, that's my testimony.

Thank you, Mr. Erick. We also got two individuals in support and one individual in opposition. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 1666 Seeing none Chair.

Thank you. Melissa. I have a question. So I was, I've read the opposition. I have it. So I think when we've done proclamations in the past, so I'm thinking like our worst case scenario, like we, the state gets wiped out and we're trying to procure vehicles.

I mean, I wouldn't want us to be in a position where you are like, members are having to do a favor for the state and you folks are selling at or below MSRP. But have you folks ever been specifically called out in emergency proclamations?

During COVID there were a series of emergency proclamations that established price controls on many goods and services. What we struggled with most at that time was not being allowed to work for a time and then eventually being deemed part of, of the critical infrastructure because consumers needed to be able to service and purchase their vehicles.

So I don't know that we specifically looked at the state being able to acquire vehicles, but I think every time there is an emergency proclamation, which sometimes can be very frequent when there's a threatened tsunami or a storm impending, et cetera.

A threat in housing?

I'm sorry

A threat in housing or lack thereof.

I guess there is an emergency proclamation to that. I think then the Governor has to weigh whether or not to exclude price controls for everything from bottled water to vehicles. So it's definitely something that we watch. I think there's a couple issues you might want to consider.

One is, you know, vehicles that are already here might be one scenario. But if manufacturers stop or are unable to ship vehicles here, that's when we really would struggle with the availability.

I just came back from the National Automobile Dealers Association meeting and a key topic that all of the State's Executive directors talked about and received workshops on was the availability and affordability of vehicles. And so being the most geographically isolated place in the world, in the country or populated in the world, we really struggle with availability.

So I would just ask that you consider that one.

And then I think that a conversation about availability when you folks. I mean from my understanding, right. If they're assessing MSRP, are they underwriting like a dealer that could operate in America, not necessarily the contingent US not necessarily a Hawaii based dealership?

I'm not sure how to answer that because our association is composed of very fiercely competitive dealers who are not able to openly talk about financial matters. But if I can gather some information from our national or an independent third party, I'd be more than glad to talk with you further about it.

Okay, I appreciate that. Thank you, Melissa. Members, any other questions? Seeing none. We'll move on to our next agenda item before us, HB 2375, related to towing practices. Establishes uniform standards for parking enforcement and towing practices on state and leased lands, including notice requirements, disability protections, consumer payment safeguards, and public reporting. Vice Chair for the testimony.

DLNR Acting Chair with comments. Thank you. Department of Accounting and General Services with comments.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. We stand on our written testimony with comments and are available for questions.

Thank you. Wyola River and Reeds Bay Boating in support. Surf Parking in support.

Good morning, Chair Kila and Vice Chair Miyake. My name is Kate Thompson and I'm the Director of Surfparking.org and we've been working for three or four years trying to establish a more uniform fair and public access on public lands, and we—could you.

I don't know if you can look through further down in your testimony, but you'll see an Excel grid that would show like each property and how the parking is managed, so, who actually runs it would be like DLNR, DAGS, and then is it state parks? If it falls under DLNR, would it be state parks?

Would it be small boat harbors? And then, who has the contacts for the parking? Who has the contacts for the towing? And what are the results? Is the property being inspected like once a year? When was the last inspection for that lake?

ADA compliance because there's a lot of variation and a lot of people's sites aren't necessarily complying in terms of ground signage, number of handicap stalls, and we're also asking for four-hour delay in towing.

And you can see in my testimony at the end that 2,512 cars were towed from the Alawai Boat Harbor last year and only four parking tickets given.

And this has been typical since the last four years since DLNR...got permission from—first, you folks did the right thing and said no to them doing their own contracts through Act 163. But now, they are doing their own contracts, and they have not worked in provisions to protect the public by creating a citation stage.

So, there are—so, we strongly request that this passes in your Committee, and moves on, and you'll see from the public testimony it's you know, essentially, 100% from the public supporting this Bill. Thank you. And I'm available for any questions.

Thank you, Ms. Thompson.

Thank you. Free Access Coalition in support. Spore Foundation in support. Margaret Callahan on Zoom. Thank you.

She might not be available.

And 15 individuals in support. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify on HB 2375?

Thank you. Members, any questions? Seeing none. Members, I'd like to move forward to the next measure before us, HB 2415, related to traffic safety. Appropriates monies Department of Transportation to install all-way crosswalks at sites of budding school properties. Vice Chair for the testimony.

Director, Department of Transportation Director, in support.

[Unintelligible]

Thank you.

Thank you.

Department of Education in support.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Sean Tajima, Assistant Superintendent, testifying on behalf of Department of Education. Department stands in his written testimony in support of this measure. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hawaii Bicycling League in support.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, we stand on—Eduardo Hernandez, Hawaii Bicycling League—stand in support of our written comments. Thank you.

Thank you. And one individual in support. Anyone else on online or in person wishing to testify on HB 2415? Seeing none, Chair.

Hello.

Thank you. Members, any questions?

I'm sorry?

Oh, sorry. I'm here to testify in support.

Can I have your name? And then, if you could turn your camera on.

Yes. So, aloha. My name is Cardenas Pintor. I use any pronouns. I am testifying in support of HB 2451. Mahalo to Chair Kila, Vice Chair Miyake, and the representatives of the Committee on Transportation for hearing HB 2451. I ride the bus here every day in Hawaii and it is covered under the UH Manoa tuition for $50 a semester.

I save a lot of money which makes a lot of—makes a huge difference in my life. And according, and I.

Wait, Cardenas, wait. I think, I—you're testifying on public transportation? We're still on all way crosswalks. I will make note—I'll make sure to get you on the next one. Mahalo. Anybody else online or person wishing to testify? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Rep. Cochran.

Thank you. Mr. Sniffen, Director, how are you? So, with this, how would counties put in like requests, you know for their area, or do you have a already pre-thought-out plan or, you know, priority list going?

The way we work with the counties is anytime our state representatives and Senators ask for improvements on county roadways, they always copy us. And we work with the counties to make the improvements. So, if the counties cannot do it quickly enough for our state legislators, we jump into assist. That's one option.

The other is there's a safe roster school program where the counties can apply for funding specifically for programs like this. Intersections, their school, school districts.

Okay. And so, funding would come through the state for this?

We'll say for up to school, we have a funding mechanism. At the state level, we've appropriated money. There's a funding mechanism that deposits money into there. This Bill would do a direct appropriation for the purpose.

Okay, all right. Very good. Support it. Thank you.

Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you, Director Sniffen. Members, I can move to the next measure before us, HB 2451, related to transportation. Beginning 01-01-2027, requires each county to implement fair free access to public transportation systems. Establishes the Fair Free Public Transportation Tax and Dividend Special Fund.

Increases the Environmental Response Energy and Food Security Tax on petroleum products to fund fair free public transportation. Vice Chair for testimony.

Department of Transportation with comments. Thank you. Department of Taxation with comments.

We stand on our comments. Thank you.

Thank you. Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization in support. Hawaii State Energy Office with comments.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Nicole...on behalf of Hawaii State Energy Office. We stand on our written testimony.

Thank you. City and County of Honolulu Council Member, Dos Santos Tam, in support. Life of the Land in support. Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members. Nate Hicks with Hawaii Public Health Institute in support of this measurement. Free public transportation is kind of like what we dream of when we want to create a good society. Right? We're not hoping that we are requiring low-income families to struggle to pay for the bus.

If we have free public transportation, we will improve our traffic situation, improve our climate situation, provide better access to everything that our state has to offer. If we can, you know, increase the number of people taking public transportation, that's a benefit to all of us, not just those who are riding the bus.

The Big Island has instituted free public transportation island-wide and ridership has doubled. This would be a huge benefit to Oahu and our other islands as well. Already the city and county greatly subsidizes the public transportation here. 85% of the cost of operating the bus is paid for by the county themselves.

Only 15% is paid for through fares. Having the state pick up this extra small part of the tab to make sure we all have public transportation would be a huge gift to everybody and be a great benefit to the state. Mahalo. Appreciate this and support this measure.

Thank you, Mr. Hicks. Hawaii Appleseed Center for Law and Economic Justice in support.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, and Members of the Committee. My name is Abby Seitz and I'm testifying on behalf of Hawaii Appleseed in strong support of this measure as providing free transit is one of the most effective ways to increase ridership, reduce household transportation costs, and improve access to employment and essential services, especially for low-income workers.

We believe this legislation has, has a potential for transformative change, leading to people to take the bus who may not otherwise try it and also, improving the lives of existing riders. Recent data from the Honolulu Bus shows that 3/4 of riders have a household income below $60,000.

The elimination of fares would mean more money for housing, groceries, and medical care for the tens of thousands of riders who—of, of residents—who use our transit systems every day. I wanted to thank the Committee for hearing this very important measure and the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments.

Aloha. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii stands on its written comments. Thank you.

Thank you. Our Children's Trust in support. Cardenas Pintor in support on zoom.

Aloha, again. Mahalo to Chair Kila, Vice Chair Miyake, and the representatives on the Committee on Transportation for hearing HB 2451. I am testifying in support of this Bill. My name is Cardenas Pintor. Thank you for correcting me on the right Bill I'm testifying for.

So, I leave the bus here every day in Hawaii and it is covered under UH Manoa's tuition for all our semester, and I'm not alone because it makes a huge difference in my life on taking the bus. The American Public Transportation Association reports that gas prices have risen by 25% in 2023.

So, it makes the ideal—it's the ideal mode of transportation for most riders. And in December of 2025, average weekly ridership in Honolulu was 124,719 people, per—Honolulu ranks eighth in potential savings from taking the bus with $1,218 per month and $14,612 per year in potential savings.

However, I do believe that instead of Honolulu being number eight, they should strive to be number one, in time, where Hawaii tackles affordability and high cost of living. It is—having spread of the barrier of transportation.

And I uplift the voices of bus riders that help contribute to our communities, which includes our keiki who are going to school to help make a better future for us, our adults who are working to help vitalize the economy and helping provide us general welfare, and our kupuna who continue to pass down their knowledge. Mahalo.

Thank you. We also got 13 individuals in support, two in opposition, and one with comments. Anyone else online or in person wishing to testify on HB 2451?

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Eduardo Hernandez, Hawaii Bicycling League. I did not have an opportunity to submit written testimony, but I want to stand with my colleagues at Hi Fi and, and strong support of this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to testify? Seeing none, Chair.

Thank you, Members. Any questions? Let's do Rep. La Chica, then Rep. Cochran.

Department of Education please. Assistant Superintendent, do you know how many how much currently the Department allocates for the county expense express program?

So, currently, we're funding city bus pass for Oahu and Kauai. I know in the, in the Bill, it said it was about 6,000 something riders. So, since then, it's increased. There's about 7,000 on Oahu and about 100 on Kauai. The holo cards for the 10 months, it costs between $25 and $30—I'm sorry, $250 and $300.

So, total estimated amount is about 2.1 million for this year.

For this school year, we've spent or?

Allocated.

Allocated.

Allocated for that.

Okay. When did we start doing the County Express Bus Program?

That was the beginning of this year. Three years ago

Three years and ever—and since we started it, demand continues to grow. More and more kids are signing up for it. Was there a year where we made it free for—there was no students didn't have to pay for the—their application?

It's free to them.

Oh, okay. And this is the first year that we made it available to middle school students to permit.

Correct. Middle school and high school.

So, if this—should this pass, and there's a new source of revenue, what will happen to the 2.1 million that didn't appropriated for the?

So, I think the bigger—the big picture of that—we wouldn't be spending that money. The money we have allocated for this is actually allocated to pay for our bus contracts for school bus. So, because of the bus driver shortage for school bus, we pay for only routes that are active and are run.

So, if they're not running a route, we don't pay the contractors for that. So, the money that we're saving from that is allocated for the city bus.

So, the idea would be if we did increase our bus drivers and we had all of our routes running, we wouldn't have the funds for the city bus, but we wouldn't need it at that point. So, I think, right now, we would just not be spending the money on city bus.

Thank you. And does the Department currently have a plan to reallocate those resources in places where perhaps there's not a route, but there's also no county bus stop?

So, we try to prioritize running bus routes in areas that there is no express bus, but we don't have any plan on how we would use this money if it was funded from another source.

I have a question, right? So, we've increased ridership because we've cut more bus routes. Right? You're saying 7,000 users?

Correct.

Because of more bus routes that got cut.

So, because we don't have enough drivers to fill all of our schools.

Sorry, yeah. Inactive bus routes, not bus truck routes getting cut.

Yeah. So, because we don't have enough drivers to fulfill all of our bus routes, we have cost savings on that, which we'd rather be paying for those routes, but because we don't have them active, we're saving money on that.

So, to provide alternative means of transportation where there are no routes available, we're providing the express bus pass for that.

Okay. Rep. Cochran.

Thank you, Chair, and maybe it's just for you. I think just the, the increase in the dollar amount was chosen how?

That was the way the Bill was written.

Oh, okay. It's just.

That's the number.

Whoever introduced it decided that would be a good figure.

Well, the 10. Yeah. Attempted figure.

Okay.

Yeah. But I would say it doesn't, it doesn't caution and take into potential inflation for operation.

Right. Okay.

Because I could imagine a strain when you have that much more ridership potentially.

Okay. No, I mean that was what I was just wondering how that came about. And then what you just stated is also some concerns, but I support.

So, and then I have another concern that we would implement this and then our other two counties would start to charge for public transportation. So, good dialogue, nonetheless. Members, any other questions? Seeing none. Let's move on to the next measure before us, relating to public transit.

Thank you, Director Superintendent forgive me, establishes a relating to public transit establishes a two year kiki free transit pilot program on Oahu and Kauai Appropriates funds. Vice Chair Miyake.

Department of Transportation in support.

Thank you, stand in support.

Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization in support. Hawaii State Department of Education in support.

Chair Vice Chair Members of the Committee Sean Tajima from the Department of Education Department stands on its written testimony in support of this measure.

Thank you Department of Health in support.

Thank you Chair and vice chair Members of the Committee.

Thank you, Life of the Land in support. Hawaii Appleseed Center for Law and Economic Justice in support.

Aloha Chair Vice chair Members of the Committee I'm testifying again in support of this measure for many of the reasons I highlighted for the last Bill.

We do in our test in our written testimony include a number of suggested amendments mainly to remove provisions around the requirement of the distribution of county transit passes and also to include Maui County and Hawaii County.

We know there are a number of bills introduced this session to enact fare-free transit for youth, some of which we are very happy that the Committee is hearing here today.

We do suggest though if the Committee chooses to move forward with this legislative vehicle that it be brought in to reduce administrative burdens around fair collection for youth and also be expansive, including in including all of the programs, all of the counties in the program. Mahalo again for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Thank you Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

Nate Hicks with Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

Thank you Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks in support. Hawaii Youth Transportation Council in support.

Aloha Chair Vice Chair Luca Cuniberti Policy and Legislation Chair at HYTC. This is kind of the same testimony I gave the other day for HB 1879. Main deal as with Abbey just said, you.

Know we we'd really like to see this kind of rolled out to all counties, not just Oahu and Kauai, because they're using their budget right now to fund their fare-free programs, which they could be using to invest in their own, you know, bus and transit networks to get more ridership, transition people away from using their vehicles. So yeah, HYTC is in support. Mahalo.

Luca, you made it to school today.

Thank you, brother, I appreciate it. And one individual in support. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify on.

Seeing none Members, any questions? Okay, if we can go to our last agenda item before us for this agenda. HB 1641 Release of Transportation purposes sale offer for sale, lease, rental, distribution, possession or operation of a high-speed electric bicycle. Establishes penalties.

Department of Transportation in support.

Thank you, it still stands.

Thank you. Attorney General's office with comments.

Morning Chair Kila Vice Chair Miyake. Members of the Committee, we have provided written comments and we're available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii Bicycling League in opposition.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, we in our written comments are concerned with the language of this Bill. If it's intended to prohibit high-speed electric devices, it should say that we believe that if a vehicle with a motor is faster than 28 miles an hour, it is not a bicycle.

And it should not be defined in any way as a bicycle. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you, Edward. I appreciate it.

Thank you. And one individual in opposition. Anyone online or in person wishing to testify by on HB 1641. Seeing none Chair.

Thank you. Attorney Generals, please. So I know I have conflicting language with this proposed legislation versus others. Return to move as I. I would not want to prohibit the sale of what what we can codify as legal bicycles because I think this one would prohibit a class potentially 2 and 3.

But if we were to do a prohibition necessarily on the rental and lease of these vehicles, because I would say. I understand. Right. Because technically we codify high speed electric device. It's road non conforming devices which are like our dirt bikes that are meant for off road use, does then that start to get kind of murky?

Does it need to be a prohibition for all or none?

I think if you classify each vehicle or each device like Mr. Hernandez said, high speed electric vehicle, I mean high speed electric bicycle versus high speed electric device, you can distinguish the two with respect to the rentals and leases. I'm not sure.

I think I'd have to take a closer look at what, what you're proposing or the language.

Because I think to that point. Right. If a rental company is leasing a vehicle that is not intended for road use, that is technically not legal. Right. So would it be used on the road or.

Right. If you're. Well, I guess it would depend on the usage. Right. So if they're explicitly advertising it for the use of the road. That's not legal.

Well, that's the thing.

So one of our suggestions with this bill was to add public to where the high-speed electric bicycles would be prohibited. And so if it's not up falls within that definition of a public roadway, then it wouldn't be prohibited.

I think that's what we've been I think I know what the introducer is trying to do. Right. I think they're intentionally trying to get those non conforming devices off roadway. And I do understand that folks buy it for fun.

But I think that's my biggest concern is that if we have companies leasing and renting them, and then it's for the intent to use on the roadways, that's the hard part. But I think it, I think there's good intent and I appreciate your comments and your testimony to help us find out a path forward. Members, any other questions?

Seeing none Members, let's recess.

Reconvening our 9:30am agenda today here in. The conference room 4:30. So I also I want to just. Acknowledge that we have this agenda for decision making and previous agenda for decision making. So Members if you folks could give. Us the pleasure of your folks time and I I just want to acknowledge.

And thank the work of Vice Chair Miyake who's pulling double duty for both the housing and Transportation committees to have to be the almost anchor for myself and Chair Evslin. I appreciate him. I appreciate the Members.

I didn't get to say this last Tuesday but I think in the interim transportation has become if not one of the biggest sticking points for constituencies across the state here in the Legislature. And I think it's reflective and the amount of bills that have been introduced. And referred to transportation.

But I am happy that we are having these discussions nonetheless because and Deputy Director Khalili will tell you that everything touches transportation whether you see it or not and I totally believe in that. So it's reflective in the bills that you folks have authored as well. If we could do Our first Bill. HB2392 related to taxation.

The chair's recommendation is at this time I'd like to defer I applaud the introducer for going to the extent of researching some of the questions I asked him and I applaud employers who already do this on their own.

I think with the several different measures that are moving before us I'd like to use those as potential vehicles in discussions for the purposes of trying to figure out transportation demand options and strategies.

Because I say this in our other bills the money we invest in public transportation is always supposed to be at a loss on paper it's a cost savings elsewhere that benefits folks greatly.

So it bills that are before us to try to expand use transportation and even do a pilot program for Department of Transportation to have subsidized transportation. I I could only imagine if we slowly adopt this further how that could affect our road users all road users. So for that that's the Chair's recommendation.

Members, questions, comments, concerns? Seeing none we're moving to the next measure before us HB 2462 relating to consumer protection. Chair the Members of Chair's recommendations defer this one as well. I think this whole space around post.

Market sale has get definitely got convoluted but I think to some degree I don't want to blame the manufacturer and or dealers for this.

I think it is also due diligent upon the consumer to understand what they're Purchasing into but I think if we start to go down this this path it could get very difficult and if I know DCCA like I know them I don't know if they necessarily want to be doing enforcing I know they're not necessary name but I have the Attorney General and I would like to just ask that the dealer board continue to have this conversation to figure out a path forward on what this this will look like because it is not going away anytime soon.

Our cars are becoming a second phone and some now you need to pay to start your car up. So I think I would like to just have that discussion further at the dealer board level and if they see fit for legislation this Committee could be.

Open to that Members questions, comments or concerns Move on Excuse me the next. Measure before us HB2423 relating to biodiesel. Chair like to adopt a HD1 for this measure I would like okay so when I say request HMSO defect effective. Date the House custom in practice is 7-1-3000. So for the public that when you.

See an efective date that is moving it is not an accident, it is intentional. When we have a efective dates it allows it to go through the legislative process upon concurrent agreement and conference should that we'll make it all the way.

That is where we adopt a effective date or a delayed start date for the purpose of consideration of legislation so. Requesting HMS also to affect the date there I want to attend I want. To amend this measure to require DBED to formally adopt and implement this program no later than 1-1-2028.

I want to clarify that DBED shall consult with Department of Transportation for the development implementation to ensure operational coordination among this program or potential program and and additionally I want DBED to do a comprehensive rollout plan to the public no later than 120 days prior to implementation for the purpose of the public to understand the timeline any fiscal considerations administrative structure for us to take into consideration.

The mechanisms that will be necessary any. Statutory regulatory adjustments that may come. I want to ensure that the implementation. Has the alignment because I think from my understanding this would not diesel vehicles. Can run up to 20% billing from my understanding and the Department to determine the details of removal rulemaking and tech.

Amendments for clarity, consistency and style. Members any questions, comments or concerns? Seeing none but sure for the votes.

Voting on HB 2423 the recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair votes Aye. All right. Evslyn Aye Representative Grandinetti Aye Representative Kitagawa Aye Representative Lachica Aye Representative Muraoka Aye. And Representative Pyrrhick is excused. Share the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Members. Our next measure before is HB 1771. Relating to carbon offsets. This is an interesting discussion. I don't want to put.in a position to have to do a program they're not equipped to do, but I think there's some discussion that we can continue to have in the next Committee.

So at this time, the chair's recommendation is to adopt the HD one with tech amendments for clarity, consistency and style, requesting each MSO defect the effective date and any further amendments as necessary. Members, questions, comments or concerns seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote, please

voting on HB 1771. The recommendation is to pass with amendments noting the excused absence of Representative Pyrrhick for the remainder of this hearing. Any Members voting with reservations any nos Chair. The recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Members, I'd like to move before the next measure before us, HB 2081, relating to commercial driver's licensing. With this one, I want to just put, right, if not one of the larger proponents of road safety as it relates to alcohol use and how that plays out onto our roadways.

This is the first I have seen this measure come before the committee, and I think when I'm having these conflicts of folks testifying in support and opposition, I do want to acknowledge the Hawaii Firefighters' testimony of acknowledging that they are open to this to be done through their arbitrary process of collective bargaining.

As a Legislature, I would like us to refrain from getting involved in these processes and procedures. So for the purpose of that, the Chair's recommendation is to defer this measure. Members, questions, comments, or concerns? Thank you. Moving forward, our next agenda item before us: HB 2334, relating to transportation environmental review. The Chair's recommendation is to adopt the HD 1--

HD one with tech amendments for clarity, consistency and style. Request HMSO defect, effect defect. The effective date and the Committee report acknowledge Director Sniffin's testimony for the purposes of expeditious construction and planning for the adoption of a measure like this. Members, questions, comments or concerns Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote, please

voting on HB2334. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting with reservations, any nos seeing none. Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Members. Our next agenda item before is HB233HB2336 relating to federal military installations. Members like to adopt the HD one on this on this measure with tech amendments for clarity, consistency and style. Request that each MSO defect the effective date and that the Committee report.

This Bill has several References to Title 23 of the United States Code, and I would just like to, in the next Committee hearing to please consider a clarification on sections 101119133 and any other any other United States Codes for purpose of clarity. Members, questions, comments or concerns?

Vice Chair for the vote, please voting on HB 2336. The recommendation is to pass with amendment. Any Members voting with reservations.

Reservations moving Rep. Conference reservations Any other Members any Members voting no. Seeing none. Chair the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you Members. Our next measure before is HB166 relating to motor vehicles. I think the conversation. I appreciate the conversation here in the Committee and I appreciate everyone has come before the Committee for the Purposes of discussion and I think as we've tried to navigate this process and procedure as we go through with different things that exist. I wanted to be clear.

I don't think the intent is to hurt our local dealerships but I express I think concern But I appreciate Hara coming forward to the table of wanting to figure out a way that if there is an independent third party that can operate working with different to see the cost that exists because I think if that if our larger manufacturers are putting dealers at a disadvantage there needs to be some clarity because I do not want this.

Obviously folks this is a free country, free market, free society and if you folks are operating at a loss and that's not being taken into consideration. Hawaii is a contingent state within the 50 states and if they're not accounting for that cost I think that is concerning.

And so with knowing how to testimony and the folks before us to try recommendation is to defer the measure. Members, any questions, comments or concerns. Thank you. Okay, next Bill before us HB 2375 related to zoning practices. Okay.

I-- we have taken up a measure previously to address a version of trying to get to the table of acknowledging toll companies and then also the public. Passing that bill, I think, has allowed us a lot more teeth for some form of regulation. This problem is not going away anytime soon, but I have concerns noting that the testimony that came forth that we have conflict both from the general public and from our state and county agencies.

I would like to just note for the record, in the interim, it was the intent for the Attorney General and I that we had requested the Department of Consumer, Commerce and Affairs to generate a licensure bill pathway for towing companies because I think 90% of our actors in the state are compliant with law, PUC regulation, DOT regulation.

It's these 10% that are rogue in doing these things unnecessarily that have been frustrating for the public and myself included to watch full-heartedly. Every industry, I think, needs to survive on the integrity of these operators. So if we can try and attempt to get a path forward, this is what the chair would like to do.

Adopt the HD 1 of this measure, and for the purposes of administration, I would like to form a working group on uniform towing practices for public parking facilities. This should be this-- this shall be administrated through the--sorry, Director Sniffen--Department of Transportation. It will serve as the administer of this program and the working group.

The working group shall consist of nine different members at the discretion of-- a custom and practice for purposes of working groups that have been made by the Legislature in the past and the working group shall, but not limited to-- shall, but not limited to review existing state and county laws, ordinance rules, and practices allowing towing of public parking facilities, examine notices of signage fees and transparency and storage policies and practices, identify the inconsistencies of jurisdictions to assess impacts on our owners and operators, develop the recommendations for uniform standard practices applicable to towing state, county parking facilities, including but not limited to due process and consumer transparency and protection, recommend legislation, administrative rule-making, or licensure, and intergovernmental agencies that are necessary to implement these practices.

The working group shall submit its recommendations and findings to propose legislation no later than 20 days prior to the convening of the legislative session in 2027, and the working group shall be dissolved June 30, 2027. Members, questions, comments, or concerns? Rep. La Chica.

Just wanted to mahalo the chair for your work on this. I do agree that those 10% of bad actors really-- it's almost predatory and they can prey on a lot of these-- our local residents who just want to enjoy our local parks and beaches. So just wanted to thank you for adding in that additional component for a larger discussion on this.

Thank you, and I've yet to see the-- I think this is-- it's one of those hot-potato subjects that nobody wants to touch but it's not going away anytime soon and I think it's only going to get worse. So if we can try to start some path forward without dropping the legislative hammer of practice, but I think let it be known that it is the Legislature's intent to come together, find a path forward, and if folks will not be able to come to a table this is-- it leaves us no choice but to legislate. So I appreciate that. Members, any other questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 2375, the recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any members voting with reservations? Any no votes? Seeing none, Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, members.

Like to move on to our next Measure before us HB 2415 if you folks would allow me, I like to adopt the HD1 and in the preamble if I could just cite the 2025 data that happened in the state of Hawaii around pedestrian and motorist fatalities. And I want to specifically highlight.

Sorry, I want to specifically highlight the incident of a Nanakuli resident by the name of Teama who passed away this in a room while waiting to cross the street on Farrington Highway.

When we drafted the Bill, it was with her in mind as I thought about how folks have just waited to cross the streets and they risked their lives. So the intent of the Legislature is to make these, these areas that abate our schools just that much more safer. And if I could add.

I want to whatever legislation that we adopt, if I could just name it after Tea, I intend to amend the measure by appropriating $5 million for pedestrian safety with $4 million from the special highway fund and a million dollars from our general fund.

I want to clarify that the improvements could include all way crosswalks, raised intersections or a combination of both where appropriate. In municipalities across the country you've seen these raised intersections that have played differently than speed bumps. It forces folks to slow down, say what you want, as controversial as they are, they work.

And I think as we look across the state to try to get ahead of the curve, I would like to see the DOT explore what raised intersections could look like that abate these areas. I'd also like to direct DOT to prioritize installation where data, crash data, pedestrian activity and traffic safety measures support these enhanced protections.

Further, the amendment will authorize DOT to utilize nationally recognized design guidance including AFTO standards, applicable USDOT Federal Highway Administration guidance while providing while preserving the department's engineer discretion to determine suitability and feasibility at each site. Acknowledging that it won't be a blanket approach.

I just want to make sure that we can prioritize data and the flexibility noting the implementation because I know that everywhere it's going to work. But if I could request HMSO to date the effective date as well and tech amendments for clarity, consistency, and style. Members, any questions, comments or concerns? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 2415. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting with reservations? Any No votes? Seeing none, Chair the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you Members, if we move on to the next measure before is HB2451 related to transportation.

Members like to adopt a HD1 of this measure and if you folks would allow me in the Committee report we have reimbursement amounts that are fixed and I think as we had in the discussion, doing fixed amounts does not necessarily just account for inflation.

So to consider clarifying language to allow a mechanism or adjusted amounts what is specified through paragraphs 1 through 4 I'm going to blank out any references of any numbers of tax increases or potential allocations and funding mechanisms and that is in this Bill.

I'd also like to do a tech amendment for clarity, consistent style and I want to do a deletion of applicable dates to taxable years after excuse me 12-31-2026 and HMSO defect the effective date. Members questions, comments or concerns? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 2451 the recommendation is passed with recommendations. Any Members voting with reservations? Any no votes? Seeing none Chair the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you Members. Next measure before us is HB2373 relating to public transit.

The chair's recommendation is deferred this this item and I just want to give you folks a preempt that there on our previous agenda there was something similar to this that will be our vehicle and I'll expand further on the discussion there and I just want to applaud I think the interim discussions that have occurred around public transportation and folks wanting to see some path forward.

So for that purpose of just trying to condense some of the things as we work on duplicity. If the chair would like to defer this measure. Members questions, comments or concerns? Rep Cochran.

Is there any entertaining adding all counties into this here?

The Bill for the next one I have, yes. Members, any questions, comments or concerns? Seeing none. Move on to our last agenda item for decision making and we'll continue on for our next previous agenda for decision making. HB 1641 related to transportation.

Okay, I know what the introducer is trying to accomplish but I don't want to pass conflicting things and I think as we move forward in our referrals from bills that are only doubles, there are so much conflicting state statutes that are existing.

We are trying to pass something without nothing and I think we need to get our framework first before we adopt anything further. So I want to applaud the work in the interim of Hawaii by seeking the Attorney General's office and Department of Transportation on a legal sound fix that will be coming.

So I'm going to hold this measure. We're going to defer decision making until February 10th at 8:01am and conference room 4:30. At that time we will be taking up our omnibus regulation implementation conduct uniform standards of E bikes.

Then I can move this measure forward, make sure we don't have conflicting statutes and statements that will be in conference room 4:30 again February 10th at 8:01am here and that is our yeah, okay. So if I can go on to our previous agenda so this was HB 1694 bring to sustainable aviation fuel tax credit.

So Members for this one if you would allow I'd like to adopt the HD one we're going to insert we'll keep the sunset date of 12-31-2035 but make this to applicable years after 12/31-2025 request the HMSO effect the effective date and we're going to adopt the DOT tax recommendations as noted in the testimony for the amending taxable years.

Wait hold on. Negate what I said about applies to taxable years Cancel that adopting the DOT Tax recommendations for the amendments that it is beginning after December 31st.

I want to acknowledge the conflicting in Chapter 235 subsection C and D I'd like to extend the 30 day deadline to 45 days to allow DOTAX and DOT the appropriate time needed to generate the forms that are necessary to allow folks to for the program to succeed and then tech amendments needed for clarity, consistency and style Members questions, comments or concerns Seeing none but sure for the.

Votes voting on HB 1694 the recommendation is to pass with amendments Any Members voting with the reservations any no votes see non chair the recommendation vote reservations Reservations for Rep. Muraoka noted the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you Members next measure before is HB 1695 relating to renewable fuel Members like to adopt the HD1 on this version and I this work I I want to acknowledge that that there is a path forward for this but I think there needs to be a little bit more work done and ask that the next Committee take this up.

So I will note the concerns raised by each SEO and stakeholders for clarity in the Next Committee in the Committee report for the next noted in the Committee report for the Next Committee to consider and if I could do tech amendments for clarity, consistency and style defect the effective date and yes okay seeing none see no further Members questions, comments or concerns. vice chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 1695 the recommendation is to pass with amendments Any Members voting with reservations, Any no vote reservations for oh no vote, no vote for Rep. Muraoka seeing no other reservations are no votes the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, members. If you can move for our next measure, HB 1986, relating to clean fuel standards. Okay. So if you folks remember, this is a similar measure that came before this committee last year, and I unfortunately didn't make it all the way to the end.

I think there's a path forward, but I want to note that when we made it to the end, I had made the adoptions and things that I had wanted. So for the purpose of consistency, I'd like to adopt the HD 1 of this measure.

I want to notate in the committee report the request for DOT and stakeholders to clarify and define, life cycle greenhouse gas emissions. I also want to adopt the DOT's requested proposed amendments that they listed and have that be applicable for the purpose of clarifying and amending the transportation for the state.

Our next amendment is that I'd like to say that to require an update and update at least biannually on some of the different best practices that exist that was noted in the testimony, and then if I could clarify that the department may consult for the purpose of jurisdiction in implementing these standards. HMSO, if they could affect the effective date--defect the effective date--and then in the measure, I'd also like to acknowledge that-- ask that the greenhouse gases designated by DOT or by EC, Energy Office, enroll-- do any consultation with Department of Health.

The DOH, pursuant to the consultation, shall not limit or transfer or supersede rule-making authority. And then, if I could add a reporting requirement in the bill for the purposes of adopting a clean fuel standard, and working, the department shall report to the Legislature with that and the report shall be not limited to customary practices of reports that exist, tech amendments for clarity, consistency, and style.

I also want to adopt language to cut-- to implement-- conduct public information sessions in each county, and we're also applicable for the purposes of maintaining the public and educating the public on a clean fuel standard, whatever that may look. And then, I want to insert for substantive rule changes or amendments the program-- after upon the program expansion implementation.

The department shall also continue the public informational sessions in each county for the purposes of participation no less than 120 days before effective rule date changes. I know that's a lot, but that was the same version that we had last year in some shape or form. Members, questions, comments, or concerns?

Chair?

Rep. La Chica. Oh. Rep--sorry.

Thank you. So looking back at testimony the other day for this particular item, there was-- is there any truth to the opposition by Mike Yule about this goes against the Navahine settlement with DOT?

From my understanding, that is not the intent, but I can understand-- everyone is free to their own interpretation, but from my understanding, the clean fuel standard could actually enhance the position of the state or our transportation network clean energy goals moving forward, and that was not raised last year when Navahine was still very much well, so from my understanding, that is not the intent of the Legislature.

Okay. Thank you.

Members, any questions, comments, or concerns? Vice Chair for the vote, please.

Voting on HB 1986, the recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any members voting with reservations? Any no votes? Seeing none, Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Okay, our next measure before is HB 1797 related to autonomous vehicles. Members like to adopt the HD1 of this one. We'd like to request the HMSO defect the effective date.

Thank you, members.

I do want to adopt the DO tax testimony and insert for the purposes that DO Tax may designate a third party administrator for qualified expenses and monitor compliance and anything further as necessary and that no credit shall be allowed unless the taxpayer has the certification.

Customer practice I also like to amend that the Motor Carrier Automated Vehicle Supervisor Training program shall equal 35% of qualified training expenses incurred of the tax taxable year provided the credit shall not exceed $10,000 per taxpayer per taxable year and the allowable credits under this section shall not exceed a million dollars in taxable year and then any tax credit that exceeds the custom and practice language of tax liabilities in excess shall be carried or may be carried forward.

That section shall be repealed on December 31, 2036. Amend and insert that the taxable years begin December 31 after years December 31, 2026. Second amendments for clarity, consistency, and style, and defect the effective date Members, questions, Comments or concerns? Rep. Evslin and then Rep Grandinetti. Or Rep La Chica.

Yeah, thank you Chair. I appreciate the amendments. I will be voting with reservations on this. As I learned from the testimony, there's already a mechanism in administrative rules to address this. I think administrator rules could be more flexible than just a prohibition in statute. Even with the sunset in there.

I think the technology on this is changing very rapidly. We know or beta from around the country that autonomous vehicles are significantly safer and can really improve pedestrian safety and driver safety or passenger safety. And I don't want to put an unnecessary block on their adoption in Hawaii.

That said, I recognize that there is the need for a supervisor in a vehicle while, you know, the training occurs on these vehicles. I would just prefer that it's administrative rules to ensure flexibility.

No, and I totally agree. And for folks the previously I had asked DOT to share and if they could in the next Committee share where the pilot programs were. I think they existed in downtown Honolulu for the purposes of understanding where Hawaii is at with the adoption. I think it's super important as well.

But I acknowledge your comments and set them in. Thank you, Rep La Chica.

I'll be voting with reservations as well, echo the same comments. And as somebody who has taken advantage of riding in an autonomous vehicle in the mainland, I've seen the benefits of this when done correctly, even if it's kind of a little freaky in the beginning.

But I can see it happening and hopefully it'll help us with, you know, reducing congestion and it's potentially good innovation for us in the future. So for those reasons I'll be voting with reservations.

Yeah I would have to just make a joke. I don't know what's worse, autonomous vehicles or some of our Hawaii drivers. So we'll we'll leave that out to pasture as me and Rep. Muraoka always talk about.

We'll be the test pilot.

I get through, I did one. Members, any questions, comments or concerns further? Seeing none Vice Chair for the vote please.

Voting on HB 1797 the recommendation is to pass with amendments noting the reservations of Representative Evslin and La Chica. Any other reservations? Any no votes? Seeing none Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you Members, our next Measure before is HB 1879 relating to public transit? I so I want to acknowledge that we have had several bills come before the Committee and moving public transit discussions. I would like to move this one as one of our vehicles, we'll doc the HD1 of this measure.

Wait, before I go there, I want to also just applaud the counties that have found ways to subsidize transportation to the purpose of having to put onto the ratepayers. There have been large discussions here in Honolulu County and Honolulu County will be seeing a rate increase.

Those rate increases will again probably hurt the folks that you need public transportation the most. And as I said prior, the money invested in public transportation will always be a loss because the net benefit is supposed to be made up somewhere else.

So I would I would like to just continue challenging the counties to be aggressive in trying to keep public transportation at the lowest cost possible to the rider so that you do not further burden these folks.

I think there are mechanisms that exist in each county where I've seen them subsidize it via their special highway fund which is applicable and using I also want to acknowledge though that us passing any potential measure in the future, I would hope that the counties don't see it as another nexus of either raising or starting to charge because I believe Maui County has a version of a subsidized transit and I think Hawaii island as well.

I know they don't have as much to operate as Honolulu or maybe even Kauai, but I just want to note that concern. So I would also like to rename it from a Department of Transportation Fair Free Youth to the Department of Transportation Subsidized Youth Transit. When you say free is misleading. It is subsidized.

That's ultimately what it is. We're going to defect the effective date on this measure.

I want to adopt DoTax's testimony for the fix and I want to insert the DTS testimony to the Committee report because previously when we heard this measure on Tuesday, I had great concern that I don't want the Department of Education to lose their aggressiveness on restoring these bus routes and see that this would be the potential vehicle to just stop having to subsidize their bus passes because there still needs to be a path forward for these bus passes to be restored and also try to acknowledge their bus driver shortage.

There will be other measures before the Committee that I think would be very beneficial in that nexus. But DTS's testimony is intentional, I think purposeful to understand that the state cannot use the county as a mechanism for the purposes of providing the transportation that is meant for school folks.

I also want to amend the measure to clarify and I think for some they may draw issue the youth that have testified. But if we are to move this measure forward, I have been on the record of saying blanket rebates have not made it to the pockets of the folks that need it the most.

I am a proponent of supporting these different income levels specifically that need it the most. I'm not trying to make this about pick and choose who deserves it more than not. But I think when we are answering to taxpayers and we do these blanket rebates, I necessarily cannot say where it goes.

But if I can carve out to make sure that this program goes to the families and the folks that need it the most, I feel very proud in saying that moving these measures have a tangible effect on these communities.

So if I could ask if I would like to amend the measure to clarify that the DOT shall administer the Youth Transit, the Subsidized Youth Transit Program in a manner that prioritizes youth who demonstrate financial or social need.

The amendment provide that examples may constitute financial or social need, not excluding, not limited to youth from households receiving public assistance, youth residing in public or subsidized housing, youth in foster care, guardianship arrangements, youth who qualify for free reduced school price meals, youth from single parent households with the income threshold tied to the federal poverty level adjusted for Hawaii.

And I want to clarify in years where the appropriations are insufficient to provide universal access, the DOT shall prioritize eligibility for the higher need youth before expanding access broadly.

Additionally, I want to amend a measure to allow the DOT to adopt rules for the verification procedures and coordination of eligibility and expand the program under special circumstances to prevent misuse, due process or duplicate enrollment.

And I want to make an amendment to make clear that nothing prohibits the Department from expanding eligibility to all youth if sufficient funding is available. But I just want them to prioritize those folks first.

The intent is to ensure that limited resources are making it to the youth and the folks who need it the most that really see transit as a public access. And I want to preserve that. DOT has the administrative flexibility for expansion.

And in the Committee report, I would ask in our next Committee that the the counties and our state agencies clarify what defines a county transit agency because I think what looks like the bus on Oahu does not look the same in any other county.

And I don't want there to be a way that they not every county can opt in. So I would just ask in the next Committee they could see that forward. And I want to blank all the appropriation amounts and mentions the numbers that are shared here. Members, questions, comments or concerns? Rep. Evslin. Rep Miyake. Oh Vice Chair Miyake, of course.

Oh no, thank you Chair. I just wanted to state that yes, Maui County does provide free bus fares for children or 24 and younger rides free Maui County and 55 and older. So hopefully it's a learning experience that maybe city and county of Honolulu can collaborate with.

I kokua that I would hope they could find a path forward to it. Rep Evslin.

Thank you. Chair. I'm in strong support of the measure. I really appreciate all the voices who came and testified in support on this transit Bill and all the other transit bills, especially luca, who maybe sounds like you might have skipped school together to come here.

But I will say as my very first time I ever testified on a Bill, I was 22ish and it was on a Bill to expand public transit. And so I hope that and I think somebody else testified said in their testimony that this was their first time ever testifying.

So hopefully testifying in support of public transit serves as a gateway shouldn't use the word gateway drug, but a gateway for these children to for a lifetime of advocacy and maybe a public service on the amendments you made. I appreciate you moving this forward.

I will say that from my perspective, I do hope that we could keep the program as universal as possible. I worry that if there's administrative burdens, you know, applied there, that somebody has to show proof of some type of, you know, means testing that this will be a significant barrier to usage of the program.

And I think that public transit is different than other means tested programs in that every time you get somebody in a bus, often that's taking somebody off of the road which provides a benefit to everybody else.

And then for this person who's getting exposure to public transit that they might not have otherwise utilized, it can help develop, you know, lifelong dedication to riding in buses and lifelong public benefit in that regard. So my hope is that we could still consider, as it moves forward, the possibility of keeping this open and universally applied.

But thank you, Chair.

No, and I concur what you say in the sense that there very well would be a generation before us, I'm sorry, a generation after us that knows nothing about public transportation as folks move away from their vehicles. And I appreciate your comments and I do want to clarify that the DOT has that flexibility.

But I think as I was sharing with folks, is that these reporting allow us, when we are talking to folks to justify the program. But what you're saying is absolutely warranted and I hope one day we can move to a future where various public subsidies transportation at the level of either the county or state.

But for the purpose of this program, I'd like to move those amendments. So I appreciate your comments, Rep. Evslin. Members? Rep. Cochran.

Thank you, Chair, and support this. But I wanted I'm hoping that the ongoing discussion will address potential issues about the taking a portion of the fuel tax and then thus reducing the amount for environment, energy and security type other uses and the other thing for Maui County.

I mean we have a really great program to, you know, help with our most vulnerable and needy community. But with that added ridership and usage, there may be a challenge with, you know, adding more service routes and vehicles itself. I know there's always an ongoing challenge because we have a lot of visitors in Maui County.

I've had professionals, you know, that try to get to work and they literally there's no room for them to get on the bus when it's those peak times during the summers and winters.

So just, you know, I think the added ridership is obviously going to add to the cost of the overall transportation needs as in vehicles and routes.

I concur. What a problem to have that they have to in the best circumstances.

So I just want to acknowledge that if we can know in the Committee report in the next times that should the measure move forward, that the Department of Transportation could get feedback and projections from each county of potential ridership increases and how that would potentially affect operation, potential expansion or even the need for further maintenance on some of their vehicle fleets and acknowledging that double edged swords I think have good intent.

But also to your point, there could be other things that we may not foresee. So if I could ask in the Committee report, the DOT coordinating with the counties for further discussion and bringing that before the next Committee shouldn't be heard. So thank you.

All right. And 11 last point that you know, as we discussing a lot of other bills to decarbonize zero, you know, and so with the fuel tax, if we're going to decrease it then and this whole program's rolling out and it's successful, what would be the alternative source of funding, I guess as we continue to say zero free emissions, you know.

So anyway, no, and I agree with that too because it should not be a mechanism. So I hope in the future we can expand it so we're not doing it based on a dwindling fuel tax collections.

Okay, great. Okay, thanks.

Members, any other question, comments or concern? Rep. Grandenetti.

Thank you Chair. Yeah. Strong support for this measure and I just wanted to echo Rep. Evslin's comments noting I guess my concern that whenever we means test there are always people just above those qualifying levels who miss out and that I really do see public benefit in investing and shifting young people away from cars and tourist buses.

Regardless of their income levels. But thank you for your work on this. Very exciting.

Sorry. Let me add maybe a provision if I could put in for even students who not necessarily just qualify for free or reduced school lunch, students who also attend Department of Education schools that are considered Title 1, so blanket appropriations for that, because I could acknowledge that somebody who was attending a Title 1 school may not necessarily Title 1 in income, so if they could even just be attending a school that receives blanket free or reduced lunch that they would also qualify for the program as well.

Okay. Any other questions, comments or concerns? Rep La Chica.

Just wanted to add as mahalo again for just taking a strong position on pushing for this when I know Honolulu county has voted to increase bus fares. It feels like a step backwards what we're trying to achieve.

And as somebody who represents a community that's very dependent on taking a personal vehicle to and from work or other areas because we're not directly on the rail line too, it's very difficult for my community to access public transportation.

And being in the Education Committee too, and having worked on the implementation of free school meals access, I would request that the Department to also focus on how we are going to directly outreach and communicate the availability of this program to kids who otherwise and their families who are too busy Possibly to write sign up, put in their application, put in the required documents.

They're often the ones who are the last to find out about programs such as this because of just what they, you know, their daily lives. And I would like to kind of see something like this benefit those that need it the most.

Absolutely. And don't worry, we're not done with the counties. We will have further discussions on the way that they do things. And I want to applaud the Chair of Housing who has acknowledged that those kind of terrible poor planning of public transportation around the largest dense areas has put us to where we're at.

And I just want to acknowledge right like I know forms, if not barriers create the most for the folks that need it the most. But I continue to say if we're going to justify a program, I think some of those reporting exists.

So I want to add that DOT may consult with Department of Education on best practices for the purpose of implementation and expansion and verified eligibility for the program to acknowledge your point that we make it to the people that need it the most.

And I think the amendments and a Bill like this to move forward for does a bottom up of bottom down. Sorry, a bottom to top effect that the folks on the bottom are prioritized, not the top Members. Any further comments? Okay, Vice Chair for the vote, please.

Voting on HB 1879 the recommendation is to pass with amendment noting the presence of Representative Pierick. All Members are present. Any Members voting with reservation? Any Members vote no? Chair the recommendation is about.

Thank you Members. Sorry, last one. I promise HB2034 so in the same conversation of transportation, I also acknowledge if we are going to request the public to take public transportation, I think we as a state in the county to put our money where our mouth is and if they would, this is the intent. So the intent of this measure is to do a pilot program for the purposes.

And I also want to acknowledge, I think if we are going to compete with the private sector, we as an employer need to find ways that allows people to feel that the money or the things that they're coming to service can outweigh necessarily going somewhere else where they pay more.

And I think just a dividend like the free public transportation allowing that cost to be absorbed by us as the employer makes us hopefully more attractive employer. So for this I'd like to adopt the HD1 of the measure requesting the HMSO defect the effective date.

I want to adopt the Attorney General's testimony for the purposes of establishing a one year program to make the terms more clear for the purposes of appropriating out the general revenue. I could do $150,000 or so much for the purposes of operating the program.

And then there's appropriated 150,000 on a highway special fund for operation and state purpose and they should be expended by Department of Transportation.

For the purposes of this I want to acknowledge when we had numbers ran on a full subsidization of the Department of Transportation in a period of five years, 100% opt in leave us $4 million for a one year pilot at $300,000 potentially.

And also acknowledge that flexibility that the State Highway Fund could come in more should general funds not match the purposes of what we're trying to accomplish.

Noting the fiscal constraints we are in this year at $300,000 we could subsidize upwards of 30% of the Department of Transportation's workforce acknowledging really the ones that pay for public transportation is Oahu and Kauai and some parts of Maui.

But this would allow us a first crack and I want to thank Rep. La Chica and sorry I forgot to add the reporting requirement in this measure to for us to further consider and I stand by my word saying that in order for us to ask the public to do this, I think we as a state other counties to step up as well.

So this is our attempt and I questions, comments or concerns Members. Rep Cochran.

So was there anything in the pilot program possibly to talk about expanding to other departments utilizing not just DOT departments.

So, the rate I will share the original, which drafted was a blanket wide appropriation, and the Bill I heard introduced last year was blanket but then it was housed under DLIR. And there have been several measures before the Legislature for consideration but they have never moved past the discussion of that large appropriation.

So for now I would just like to pilot DOT. I've chose specifically DOT for the subject matter of the Committee and we oversee legislation that comes before the DOT that affects the DOT.

So I I would like to know in the Committee report that when we do the reporting if DOT could consider how the further implementation and cost considerations for a statewide implementation or county by county all those different public employees could opt in.

But I hear what you're saying, but for that is a position of piloting our one Department. So I don't want to say restrict in the future that we can't. But for this purpose, we'll just do DOT.

Okay, thanks. It's a good start.

Thank you Members. Any other questions, comments, concerns? Vice Chairman.

Voting on HB 2034 the recommendation is to pass with amendment. Any Members voting with reservations? Any no votes? Seeing none Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Colleagues, I just want to thank you again for your folks time and I do want to just continue to thank Vice Chair Miyake. That was a monster agenda to move forward to. And as you continue these discussions, I appreciate your folks willingness and your reflections and your opportunities of engagement.

Appreciate the public that come here and continue to testify before the Committee and I applaud all the youth that also have come before this Committee. Please stay engaged and we will see you at the next Committee hearing. With no further business. This Committee is adjourned.