Senate Standing Committee on Education

Welcome to the Committee on Education being held jointly with the Committee on Labor and Technology. I apologize, our agenda is at 2:01 o'clock. So we're starting with the joint agenda first and then we'll proceed to the second agenda, which is education only. We are in room 229. Today is Friday, February 6th. Yay. For the weekend.

But in the unlikely event that we must end abruptly this hearing due to technical difficulties, a Committee will reconvene to discuss any outstanding business on Monday, February 9, 1pm in this conference room, 229. And a public notice will be posted on the Hawaii State Legislature's website. And this meeting is being streamed live on YouTube.

In light of the time and the amount of measures that we want to cover, we before the Committee, your testimony will be limited to one minute. We will be asking questions and so that discussion could go on beyond that. There are how many items?

We have four items on the joint agenda and then two others on the education only agenda. So with that, I want to welcome our chair of the labor and Technology Committee, Senator Elefante. And we want to start off with Senate Bill 3179.

This bill relates to the safety of educational workers, requires the Department of Education and public charter schools to take certain steps to report incidents of harassment, and implement procedures of handling harassments of educational workers. I think we're all familiar with some of the harassment that's gone on in our schools, so this is really important measures. First person that we would like to call up would be the Department of Education.

Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee, Sean Tajima, Assistant Superintendent for the Office of Campus Operations and Support, testifying on behalf of the Department of Education. The department stands on his written testimony in support of this measure. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much. Let's see. The Attorney General's Office.

Good afternoon, Chairs Kim and Elefante, Vice Chair Kidani, and members. Anne Horiuchi from the Department of the Attorney General. As we stated in our testimony, a couple of clarifying amendments-- in a couple of sections, it's just to clarify that the bill is addressing harassment that is directed at the educational worker because of the worker's position as an educational worker.

Also, regarding the provision about the DOE assisting educational workers with legal actions, we're suggesting an amendment to make sure that that's limited to actions to obtain temporary restraining orders.

And then finally, our last note was that, as written, the bill does not specify that the harassment must come from a source outside of the DOE or charter school. So if this is the legislature's intent, then we think that the bill should be amended to make that clarification. Thank you.

Okay. Appreciate those recommendations. Let's see. We have Osa Tui for the HSTA.

HSTA stands on its written testimony.

Thank you. Welcome to have you here. Ed Noh for the Public Charter Schools.

Aloha, Chair Mercado Kim, and Elefante, and members of the committee. PJ Foehr, on behalf of Dr. Noh and the Charter Commission. We stand on our submitted testimony in support of SB 3179.

Okay, thank you so much. Joy Bulosan, testifying for HGEA.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chairs, and members of the committee. Joy Bulosan, on behalf of HGEA, standing on our written testimony.

Thank you. Tuli Tafai for UPW.

Tuli Tafai, on behalf of UPW, standing in our strong support on this measure.

Okay, thank you. And then we have several others that have testified in support. Is there anyone here in this room that would like to testify that not have signed up? Anybody online? Nothing? Okay, with that, we're open for questions. Members, questions? I have a couple of questions. Maybe DOE. So the DOE has a policy for harassment already, right? For your employees?

So we're developing a standard practice right now, and it's in draft form, and we're in consultant and confer process. So the units have been very responsive to us. So given the recent events, we're trying to expedite the process so we'll have something formal coming out. Fortunately, with everything in the SP are components that we already have, but we want to package it into a standard practice.

Okay. But that policy is only for within DOE employees, correct?

Okay, so this bill then, we want to target outside, again, to make it clear what the AG brought up, that whether or not this is for overall or just to target non-DOE employees coming onto the campus.

Correct.

Correct. So the SP addresses harassment by non-employees. Yeah.

Right. Okay, so you folks are fine with that, the amendments, in there? Okay. And then, what about as far as the investigation? It does say conduct a formal investigation.

So we wouldn't do the same as a personnel investigation because it involves an outside party, but it would have the same components because we'd be asking for statements, we'd be asking-- we'd be doing interviews and doing an analysis to come up with the determination.

Okay. So the intent is not to hire out a full-on, full-blown investigation?

No. No. We can do that in house.

Okay. And then finally, the question on training, according to the bill, we say you may implement it into-- provided that the training may be included in the annual safety training provided by the department for all employees. So is it your intent to embed it?

We're looking at that right now. I think we want to have everything packaged first and we want to be able to have the training ready to share with the employees on how to access it. We're looking at considering including in the opening of the school year packet, but we would be reviewing it on an annual basis.

Okay. So if we change the word, to may, to shall, that way you embed it and not necessarily have to have the teachers come to a whole separate-- another training class.

Sorry, can you repeat that again?

Yeah. Instead of-- you know, because that the-- currently, the bill says, may be included, which means you could do it another way. You could have another whole one-hour separately and force teachers or employees to come in and to do an extra training. And so in light of that, if it's embedded already, is, I think, preferable. But I hate to come back a couple years now and people say, you know, we're spending so much time in all these trainings and stuff, so.

Yeah. Thank you for recognizing the amount of trainings that we have.

The training is good, but we also need them in the classroom.

Yes, correct. Can we get back to you on that?

Okay. What? Yes.

Hi. Elizabeth Higashi from the Department of Education. One of the things right now is we're evaluating existing trainings that our teachers are already going through that have deescalation techniques being in there that maybe perhaps are targeting EAS security and special education teachers.

So we're evaluating a matrix of what is existing and then what are other opportunities for other employees because we don't want to do a repetition and minimize the impact of the training. So we're looking at what are different options that we can provide for employees.

Well, good. Yeah. I appreciate you doing that so it becomes more efficient, and that's why we want to make sure that this training is embedded in what you folks are doing and not a whole separate other one.

Correct. That's something that we definitely wanted to take in and to call into impact to our employees prioritizing instruction.

Right. Because hopefully, this is not something that's going to happen on a regular basis. But when it does happen, we want to make sure that people know how to address it and so forth. Right?

Okay. Good. Who does the training? You folks have people.

Yes.

So we have our Safety Office who's coming up with the training right now and we're going to be prepared to-- once the standard practice is approved by the unions and we agree on something, we're going to roll out the training from there.

Okay.

The training is for on and off campus?

Just on campus. If we see--

So what about training that happened--I mean, harassment and threats that happen off campus? It's not on school property, but near, nearby, on the way.

So we wouldn't extend our jurisdiction off campus unless it was at a school event that was at another site.

Yeah. Then the police would have to get it. Then the police would be the one you would contact.

Yes.

Chair, you have any questions? Sure. Senator Moriwaki.

Yeah. Just to go into the training, because I just met with some HSTA members, and they're saying that when you provide training or when you say they have to go through training, they have to take it out of their own pocket for training.

So is this-- if you're requiring the training, are you folks paying for it and you're giving them time off, or how are you going to be doing this training when you say you're going to train everybody? I'm just wanting to be sure that you're not putting another thing on teachers without giving them either time off or paying for the training.

Correct. And that adds to Senator Kim's concern about the amount of training. So this would be part of their workday.

Yeah. It'd be embedded in the-- whatever trainings they have already. Yeah.

It would probably be at a faculty meeting or opening of the school year for everybody.

Okay. Any other questions, Members? No? Okay. Thank you. We'll move on to the next agenda item, Senate Bill 2872. This is relating to retired education employees.

Requires rehiring of teachers for retirees, for teachers or administrators in shortage areas or difficult to fill positions to be paid the entry level salary for the teacher or administrator position, as negotiated in the collective bargaining you unit contract. We have, first up on this is Department of Education, once again.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chair, Members of the committees. Tammy Chun, Department of Education. Department of Education supports this Bill. There's things that need to be worked out from a collective bargaining point of view, however. Thank you.

Thank you. Attorney General's Office.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chairs, and Members of the Committee. Jenny Nakamoto, Deputy Attorney General. We did submit comments on this Bill, specifically asking to include perspective in—on—pages three and four to add in after retiring teachers hired after June 30th, 2026.

And we also asked to add in a section three where the act wouldn't affect the duties matured already.

Can you expound on that?

So, section three, we're seeking to include language that the act would not affect rights and duties that have matured already.

So, in other words, you know, whatever they've accrued up until that time, we wouldn't be affecting those people. It's only those teachers who come back to work under this, who have been retired already, moving forward after June 30th.

Okay. Is there six, the six month or the one year?

I believe this one is the 12 month.

Okay. The other bill that's—the other Bill is six months. Is that right? You probably don't know that. Yeah. Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Again, mixed up for so many different bills. Okay. Osa Tui from HSDA. Thank you. Calvert Young.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Members. So, the Board of Trustees for the Employee Retirement System has not reviewed or taken an official position on this Bill, but Administration has submitted testimony just offering comments and those comments summarized are that there are a number of components already in the proposed Bill.

So, as the Bill continues to progress, it would be good for the Legislature to keep focus on those because they are related to the overall sustainability of the pension system itself.

So, what in particular we should be focusing on?

So, this Bill, as you mentioned, with the last testifier, this Bill sets a 12-month element break source versus the previous—or the other Bill—which was six months.

So, our recommendation on the previous Bill was that it should be 12 months because there is already, in the existing statutes, this provision. For other applications, it's 12 months.

And the 12 months is important because it the IRS code requires that there be a bona fide break in service in order to not jeopardize the tax exempt status of the pension system. So, that's why the recommendation is this Bill has 12 months.

So, keep an eye on, you know, that that is a good mark because it's already consistent in statute. The other thing is that the way these positions get determined or classified of which positions are applicable for this return to work, the way it is written, it's good because it's spelled out.

And it also involves the human resources directors of all the employer jurisdictions. So, in this case, the DOE, the state DHRD, that is important to, again, maintain consistency across the application for all positions within government employee—in this case, Department of Education.

Thank you. Edo Charter Schools.

Aloha, Chair Mercado Kim and Chair Elefante. PJ Foehr on behalf of Dr. Ngo. The Commission stands on its submitted testimony in support of SB 2872 and is here to answer any questions.

Thank you. Glenn Kagima. Is he here? Not here. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure that didn't sign off? Okay. Members, we are open for questions. Any questions from anyone? I had a couple.

Do we have a time limit on this measure?

On approval.

Okay. Can we do five years? Was that the other Bill? I'm getting mixed up. Okay, we can—we could look at that. Other than that, I don't believe I have any questions. Members, you have any questions?

I think this Bill is, is very important, along with the next Bill that we will take up, because it certainly helps to fill the pipeline.

We get teachers who've been teaching, have all the experience there, and so, certainly, would be advantageous if these people want to come back and help us at least temporarily while we train our, and get our licensed teachers on board. Okay. With that, I'm going to switch over to our Labor Chair for the next two bills.

Okay, thank you so much, Chair. Our next item on our agenda, Senate Bill 2391. This is relating to education. Pursuant to collective bargaining agreement negotiated for Bargaining Unit 5 and subject to the availability of funds, provides annual step increases for public school teachers who have completed one year satisfactory service and comply with specific requirements. First up on our list is JN Musto, Office of the Collective Bargaining, Chief Negotiator, in opposition. IT, is Mr. Musto on Zoom?

Not on Zoom, Chair.

Thank you. From the Attorney General's Office, Amanda Donlin or Jeffrey Kent. Aloha. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chairs. I'm Jeff Kent. I'm Deputy Attorney General. Basically, we have comments on this bill. Basically, while the intent on this is good, it conflicts with the collective bargaining process and Chapter 89. We did provide some language to allow for this if you did want to proceed with it. And then we also have some very tiny technical amendments. Don't really affect the subject at all.

Okay, thank you, Deputy Attorney General Kent. We also have in person from the DOE Superintendent Hayashi or representative.

Good afternoon. Tammi Chun, Deputy Superintendent. The Department of Education provides comments on this matter. We appreciate the support in improving our ability to attract and retain teachers. The comments that we have are, there's details in the testimony, but I just wanted to summarize to say that Bargaining Unit 5 includes more than people who are teachers.

It includes counselors, librarians, and other job titles. So we just wanted to clarify that. And the other is we would like for consideration for the step increase to extend to the other bargaining units in the Department of Education as well. Some of the other ones have also have shortages. And then finally, if this is passed, requesting funding to provide to cover the cost.

Okay, thank you so much. We have Piikea Kalakau-Baarde. Okay, thank you so much. Standing in support. Tuli Tafai from UPW.

Tuli Tafai on behalf of UPW standing on our testimony providing comments.

Okay. Providing comments. Thank you. Grace Brown. Okay. And TFA is Teach for America. Right? Got it. Osa Tui, HSTA. Aloha. Welcome.

Aloha, Chairs, Committee Members. Thank you so much for having us. I'm Osa Tui, President of HSTA. Nice to see you all again. With regards to testimony that said this violates collective bargaining, so forth and so on, I would like to strongly point out the fact that our collective bargaining agreement says the parties recognize that annual incremental step movements are a viable recruiting and retention tool. So the parties are the employer plus us. So not just us.

Teachers who are not at the top of the salary schedule and who have effective evaluations shall move to the next highest step of the corresponding class at the beginning of each school year. Annual increment step movements are subject to funding. So that is already bargained language. So to say that this violates collective bargaining is ridiculous.

I will also say that you folks asked for and we had a study conducted on salaries, and the salary study basically said that, you know, in jurisdictions where they have annual salary step movement things are better. So we appreciate your consideration of this. Mahalo.

Thank you. Deborah Bond-Upson. IT, are they on? Is this person on Zoom? Deborah?

Not on Zoom, Chair.

And then we have John Fitzpatrick on Zoom in support.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

Okay, that completes our list of registered testifiers. I'll also note that there were 16. 16 in support, two in opposition, and three comments. Any questions, Members? Okay, if not, we'll move on to our last item on our agenda, Senate Bill 3282. This is relating to the Workforce Pell Grant Program.

Establishes the statewide framework for the implementation of the federal Workforce Pell Grant program to provide financial aid for certain short term workforce education and training programs. First up on our list, from the Attorney General's office, Candace Park or in person. Welcome.

Thank you. Good afternoon. Chairs, Vice Chairs and Members of the committees do the- do to the involvement of University of Hawaii in this Bill, we suggest indicating that it's a matter of statewide concern. Thank you.

Thank you. Debora Halbert from University of Hawaii. Or Debora. Is it Debora?

It's Debora. My dad spelled it wrong on my birth certificate.

I'm sorry.

Good morning or afternoon. Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the Committee, Debora Halbert, Vice President for Academic Strategy. The University of Hawaii stands on its testimony. Happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

Thank you, Debora. We also have Sherry Menor, President of the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii, in support.

Aloha. Chairs, Vice Chairs. On behalf of Chamber of Commerce Hawaii. We stand on our written testimony. In support.

Okay. In support. Thank you. That completes our list of registered testifiers. A total of that was 3 in support, 0 in opposition, and 3 comments. Anyone else that wishes to testify in Senate Bill 3282? If not. oh, yes. zero, sorry, Director. I missed you. I had you down, but it didn't say.

No, no, he was down. But he didn't have in person or Zoom. Go ahead Director.

Good afternoon, Chair Elephante, Chair Kim, Vice Chairs Lamosao and Kidani, and Members of the Committee. I'm Jade Butay, Director of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations. We stand on our submitted written testimony offering comments. You have our testimony.

I just want to add that besides talking with NSWA or the National State Workforce Agency and other states, we, along with, UH, DOE and Workforce Development Council, have been participating with the National Governors association session on implementing the Workforce Pell Grant. You know, make sure that we navigate the changes and, you know, we ensure a successful implementation.

So you have our continued commitment for- that we will do what is necessary and proceed accordingly. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Director Butay. Anyone else on Senate Bill 3282? Okay. If not Members questions?

Yeah, Jane, can you come back up? Jake.

Who exactly is the point person at the Administration that is bird dogging this to make sure that we can comply with the new regulations?

I've been to conferences on the mainland and this is a big concern as to how the changes that are going to be occurring and that the jurisdiction according to the feds is rest with the governor's office. So.

Yeah, so it's been WDC who's been coordinating the meeting you kow. WDC Workforce Development Council.

Okay, another person there.

Bennett Misalucha.

And where do you, where do you see the timeline on this from the feds?

Well, we're waiting for the, you know, the guidance from DOE. They're creating the rules and you know, they're working with the DOL. They're providing the technical and the support. I mean, they've been saying soon, but you know what.

When you say DOE, you're talking about.

US DOE, U. S. Department of Education.

Yeah, I was told it was the early summer maybe.

Well, it's. I think it should be sooner because by July 1st it's supposed to, you know, this is supposed to.

Supposed to be right. Yeah, yeah. So doesn't give us a whole lot of time. Will this affect all the Pell grants or just the workforce portion?

Just the workforce portion. I mean, I know when the, you know, on the one big beautiful Bill, they tried to put all the, you know, the Wagner Pfizer into, you know, into one. They call it Make America Skilled Again.

So I mean the way the, this Administration, I mean they've not just delayed the distribution and funding, but they've also, you know, shifted some policies.

Okay, so do you feel that this Bill can proceed prior to them?

I don't think you would need a statute to do what we're doing now. I think we, you know, you just because plus, I mean there's still some, you know, I think there's still a lot of uncertainty until we, you know, until we get the rule, I don't think we should, you know, finalize.

So are you saying that you have the adequate staffing and funding to go ahead with this?

I mean, depending on which entity is going to be doing the, you know, like in terms of the grant making, I mean, I know we've already, UH, you know, our own workforce development division, they, you know, they have the expertise on, you know, getting processing federal grants so they understand the compliance requirements, the audits.

So have you guys discussed it as to whether or not there are appropriate staffing and funding to proceed?

I think, you know, like I said this is a. I don't think we should overhaul the, you know, the system because until we know what's coming down, I mean, we shouldn't overhaul the system, but I think we should be meeting and making sure that we're prepared.

Director Butai under rulemaking authority. So you meant. So in the Bill, it has the Workforce Development Council. Do you think that's the appropriate entity or should it be DLIR in feneral?

I mean, the way that the WDC is designed, it's an advisory. It's not a.

So they don't do the rulemaking now?

No, the rulemaking when you're talking about is the U.S. DOE. They will be the one. That's okay. Yeah, they're not doing the rulemaking.

But we have, you may adopt Chapter 91 as necessary.

Well, they can do rulemaking if you guys want them to, you know, because.

Do they do that now, though, is the question.

If that's the policy. Yeah, they can. They can do the rulemaking.

Okay or would you prefer that to be under DLIR because DLIR can do rulemaking itself? Yeah.

Yeah, we do.

Okay. Thank you.

Is that a preference? Oh, yeah.

Go ahead. Senator Moriwaki.

Director, as I look at the workforce development console, it is advisory from the governor's office or as the Governor and that I look at the Members of this group for the Pell Grant, and it's a Pell Grant program.

It looks like it goes across the board with various organizations, including the university and doe. And so it seems to be a purview of all of the various agencies in order to really execute on project. So I'm just wondering whether this Workforce Development Council, as I understand it does have Members from across the board.

So, you know, in terms of this. Is this Bill, it seems to allow for that and be able to be much more expansive in terms of programming. So I'm not sure whether within Department of Labor and the Workforce Development Division that it. It really does provide that kind of extensive review by various agencies across the state.

So how would it be different if it were under WDD instead of wdc, Workforce Development Division in Labor Department versus Workforce Development Console across the board, from the university to the Department of Education to other organizations that practice private sector as well.

Well, I was just talking about, you know, the constant consultation, you know, can be done by the wdc, but in terms of the administering, I think is. That's what I'm trying to point out, that if you. You gotta have, you know, I mean, the, the Pell Grant.

I mean it's not a. I don't think you learn it overnight on how to administer because you could jeopardize. You know, you could get audit findings or even lose federal funds if you're. If you're not in compliance.

It very well might be that funding can go to various agencies, not necessarily through Department of Labor. So it can be a collaborative among Members of the Workforce Development Council, could it not?

Yeah, absolutely.

Thank you. Thank you. Chair.

Would you be okay Director, if we put the rulemaking authority under DLIR?

That's fine.

Okay, thank you. Members. Any further questions? Okay. If not, do you want to recess or roll into dm? Yeah, I'm ready. Okay. We're going to go into decision making.

Okay, Members, going back to Senate Bill 3179. This is relating to the safety of educational workers. The fact that DOE is working on a policy for their harassment within the employees of the DOE. The recommendations would be that this measure would apply to anyone non DOE outside of the DOE family.

Also a recommendation is to amend on page 5 the word "may" be embedded into training on the training issue, "shall be" and that we on the question with the Attorney General the TR that any legal actions support would be with the TRO process only.

And there were a couple other Attorney General amendments that also would like to adopt, adding the words because of the educational workers position as education. Was there anything else I think that carries in any other technical amendments that may be necessary. Any questions Members? Any discussion? hearing none.

The recommendation then would be to amend to an SD1. For the vote, Senator Kidani.

Senate Bill 3179 to pass with amendments. Chair votes aye. Vice Chair votes aye. Senator Fukunaga excused. Senator Hashimoto? Senator DeCorte? The amendments are adopted.

For the Committee on Labor and Technology same recommendation as EDU to pass with amendments. Any discussion? If not Vice Chair Lamosao for the vote. Chair votes aye.

Members voting on SB 3179 recommendation of the Chairs to pass with amendments. Chair votes aye, Vice Chair also votes aye. Senator Ihara excused. Senator Moriwaki? Senator Favela is also excused. Chair, your accommodation is adopted.

Okay. And the next the next Bill is Senate Bill 2872. This is relating to the retired education employees. This, Members this actually this Bill amends the current education law and what I would like to recommend is we delete the words that it only applies to only hard to fill and addresses such a shortage.

I think this should apply to everybody. It should apply to all of the schools. Yeah, charter schools. And whether they're hard to fill or not. Which then addresses some of the issues I think in the pilot- pilot project. That is a Bill we're going to hear later. So. Removing that and. Yeah, I think that clarifies that.

Did I miss anything? And any AG recommendations that we can go over and any technical amendments if there needs be. So with that, any discussion Members? Hearing none. Chair. Chair votes aye on Senate Bill 3179 with amendments.

I'm sorry. 2872

Senate Bill 2872 with amendments. Chair votes aye, Vice Chair votes aye. Senator Fukunaga, excused. Senator Hashimoto. Senator DeCorte. Measures adopted. Thank you.

For the Committee on Labor and Technology. Same recommendation on Senate Bill 2872 to pass with amendments. Any further discussion? If not, Vice Chair Lamosao for the vote. Chair votes aye.

Members voting on 2872. Recommendation of the Chair is to pass with amendments. Now noting all Members present from Labor Committee and Technology. Anyone voting with reservations or no? Hearing none. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you so much. Our next item on agenda is Senate Bill 2398. This is relating to Education. Chair is going to recommend that we pass with amendments. We're going to adopt the AG's proposed amendments in their testimony. We're also going to change the effective date to January 1, 2077. Any further discussion?

What Bill number is that?

We are on 2391. Any discussion? Members? Okay. If not Vice Chair Lamosao with the vote. Chair votes aye.

All right. Members voting on 2390. SB 2391. Recommendation of the Chair is to pass with amendments. Noting all Members present. Anyone voting with reservations or no? Hearing none. All Members vote aye. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Same recommendations for Committee on Education passed with amendments for Senate Bill 20-2391.

Chair votes aye. Vice Chair votes aye. Senator Fukunaga, excused. Senator Hashimoto. Senator DeCorte. Mission adopted. Madam Chair. Thank you.

And then our last item on our agenda is Senate Bill 3282. This is relating to Workforce Pell Grant Program. Chair is going to recommend that we pass with amendments. We're going to adopt the AG's amendment in their testimony to include a statement that, quote, this Bill is a law of statewide concern, end quote.

And then we're also going to adopt the Office of Information Practices OIP amendment in their testimony under subsection D. Information produced pursuant to this section and designated as confidential shall be protected from public disclosure to the extent authorized by Chapter 92f.

We're also going to do technical amendments and then also hearing from the testimony from DLIR Director on page 12, starting with line 3, the rulemaking authority will be to the Department, the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations. And then we're also going to change the effective date to January 1, 2077.

And if I didn't say that previously, we're also going to make tech amendments. Any further discussion, Members? Okay. If not for Committee, labor and Technology Vice Chair Lamosao for the vote. Chair votes Aye.

Voting on SB 3282. Recommendation of the chair is to pass with amendments. Only Members present. Anyone voting with reservations or no? Hearing none. All Members vote Aye. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

[Roll Call]

Hang on. If we can go back to. I'm sorry Members.

The decision on 2391.

To reconsider our previous decision on Senate Bill 2391 relating to education. I know we just voted on that, but Chair Kim also wants to.

We had amendment that. I'm sorry if I slipped my mind to include charter schools into the steps as well. I mean, they're also teachers and they should be included. And that was a amendment that somehow got overlooked in the whole process. So if we can go and amend that to also include that amendment.

Members, is there any objections to including that amendment? So do we need to take a revote on that?

Probably should. An abundance of caution. We'll take a revote. We have vote sheets, actual vote sheets. Okay.

This is Senate Bill 2391. Hold on. We have to vote. She and the vote. She does say amend with amendment, so I don't think we need to actually retake the whole. But we can verbally. There are no objections to the vote that was taken earlier.

So technically, since everyone voted for it. Someone in the majority can move to. Basically, in effect, move to reconsider. And then now and no objection to that. So now we're voting on the Bill. So you can just use one sheet.

Right. Okay. So why don't we just do that technically orally here, if that's okay. I'll defer to our veterans in the room. So, Members, what we're gonna do is we're gonna reconsider the committee's previous action on Senate Bill 2391 relating to education. And that was we were gonna report it out with amendments.

The amendments that were stated was we're gonna adopt AG's proposed amendments in their testimony and change the effective date to January 1, 2077. We're going to reconsider that. So is there a second to reconsider? Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Any objections to the reconsideration, if not Members. Now we're back to the previous Bill.

So we're going to include the charter school in this amendment. So we're going to pass with amendments, adopt AG's proposed amendments in their testimony, and then also include charter schools as part of this Bill. Any further discussion on that? Is that correct? Yes. Okay. With that being that no further discussion.

Vice Chair Lamasao, we have to take a vote. You have to take a vote again?

Yes. Yeah, we don't have to, but, yeah. Voting on SBA 2391. Recommendation of the chairs to pass with amendments, noting all Members present. Anyone voting with reservations or no? Hearing none. Chair, All Members vote aye. Your recommendation is adopted.

And same action for the Committee on Education for the Senate that we are amending this Bill to include the charter schools as well as the other amendments mentioned. And so with that, Chair votes Aye.

Members, if there's no objections to the amendments.

Okay, thank you. Thank you. We're adjourned.

Hold on, hold on. I just wanted to make my note. I know I wasn't here. Oh, my support for the Relating to Safety education workers Bill 3179. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Anyway, appreciate it.

We appreciate that. Thank you. We are adjourned. Okay.

Okay. We'd like to call to order the Committee on Education for the Senate on our second agenda item. It is 1:44pm we are still in Room 229. And it is still Friday, February 6th. First item on the agenda is Senate Bill 2836. We did pass out the first measure earlier in this meeting.

If anyone wants to come and still testify, you can do so. I think the author of this measure is satisfied with the Bill that we passed, so we could easily defer the measure. Yeah. So anyone wishing to testify? I'll make it simple. Instead of calling through the names. Okay.

That takes us to the next item and the agenda. The last item on the agenda, Senate Bill 2181. Increases the public school instructional hours beginning in 2027-2028 school year. First to testify, let's see.

Apologize. There it is.

Okay. Attorney General's office. I'm sorry, that was the first. That was 2836. 2021. Elizabeth Higashi, DOE. And everybody looked like what the attorney General.

What? Chair we're on 2181.

2181. What did I say? Okay, please go ahead. We're all kind of. Friday. It's okay. It's Friday.

I'm on the same page. So. Chair Mercado Kim, Vice Chair Kidani and Senate Committee Members. I'm Elizabeth Higashi from the Department of Education. We stand on our written testimony. Thank you.

And that is we provide comments. In opposition.

We provide comments and the only concern we have is in regards to collective bargaining with regarding to the minutes.

Okay, thank you. Osa Tui in opposition.

Chair, vice chair, Members of the Committee. Yes, as mentioned, there are collective bargaining implications of this Bill. Basically says for students to go from a six hour day to a six hour 45, 40 minute day every single day. So of course the 40 minutes needs to be bargained. Thank you.

Why don't you stay there? Because I don't believe. Is there anyone else? No one else signed up to testify in person. So anyone else here wishing to testify this measure? Yes. Come on up. Are you wearing the same shirt? So yes.

Aloha. Aloha. I'm Tiffany Edwards Hunt. I am a student activities coordinator at Keaʻau Middle School. I just would like to express my opposition to this. I get the idea of having our students learn longer. I just know as a teacher and a parent how mentally exhausted they are after our existing day.

I also know that I'm still trying to argue for hazard pay and higher pay. And then to be sitting in this meeting to be told let's increase your hours. It just feels wrong.

And I also would like you to consider the fact that many of our students are in sports and they need a little downtime, they need a little afternoon snack time because my children do not get home until 6:30 or 7:00 clock and we live 15 minutes from our school.

I live in a very ideal environment considering some of my colleagues and other parents. We have children that don't get home until 7 o'clock, 8 o'clock and 9 o'clock at night, depending on their extracurricular activities.

And for me, who is a big proponent of social and emotional learning, all of those things are very important, particularly in our rural areas. We need to keep our children busy. That's how they stay healthy. So I would like for you to just take a holistic perspective here.

Do us right with the hazard pay, increase our pay and then let's talk about increasing the instructional hours. Thank you so much and aloha.

Thank you. Very well said. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure. If not Members, we're open to questions. Senator DeCorte, did you had your hands up?

Yes. Thank you. Osa thank you so much for being here. I do share the same concerns as you do as far as the time period of our kids staying a little longer, teacher teachers having to put in a little bit more. So yeah, I guess it's just a comment. So I just wanted to share that.

Have you received some feedback from other teachers about this?

Well, we're just not sure. So this asks to extend the students' day by 40 minutes. Basically, currently, what it is now is 1080 hours per year, and those hours are Bill-to-Bill. So if they're having breakfast, lunch, recess, all of that is included in that.

So I mean if you're going to add 40 minutes and have more recess because honestly the kids have been like we're going to learn how to take a test all day long. Right. And so sometimes more downtime, we've kind of reduced the amount of recess some of these kids have had.

So if we're going to increase those types of things that allow them to break down. But again this is all something that we need to collectively bargain as well. But if you're going to just say it's 40 more instructional minutes, that's problematic because teachers are already burnt out. Right.

And then like people don't want to come into the profession. So let's make it worse.

Just one follow up. Chair, thank you for mentioning that. Because schools have different bell schedules. So as example Nanakuli High School, we only have one recess. And so when the school had made the transition, teachers were losing their voice. So it took some getting used to.

But I do believe in your your stand with it's going to pretty much burn out a lot of teachers and maybe overload the students.

And actually Senator, we saw on your side when Race to the Top happened and we increased the school day by one hour in your side the kids were not paying attention. They were like dead by the end of the day. And like do we want to go back to that?

No. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you Chair.

Please note that you know, I'm not the one at this on this table. You should use this measure.

So we're aware. We're definitely aware.

But you know we are equal opportunity Committee and we try to hear all the members' bills and take that into consideration. But yeah. Thank you for your testimony. Anybody else wanting to testify or any other questions, Members? Hearing none. I'm going to go into decision-making and your children.

This measure is to defer the Senate Bill 2836. This is we've already passed the Bill, the first Bill which is more encompassing and takes into consideration by the project which we should be pilot. We should be a permanent, hopefully permanent position. We can have our retirees come back and assist us.

As for Senate Bill 2181, the recommendation also is to defer this measure indefinitely. Any discussion? Hearing None. We are we are adjourned. Make up for all the.