House Standing Committee on Agriculture & Food Systems

Good morning everybody. I'd like to call the Committee on Agriculture and Food Systems to order. This is our Wednesday, February 11th hearing. It's 9:30am and we are in Conference Room Room 325 at the State Capitol. Just going to go over some housekeeping before we get started.

So, because morning hearings must adjourn prior to floor session, not all testifiers may have the opportunity to testify. In that event, please know that your written testimony will be considered by the Committee. In order to allow as many people to testify as possible, there will be a two minute time limit. Or testify.

For those on Zoom, please keep yourself muted and your video off while waiting to testify. And after your testimony is complete, the Zoom chat function will allow you to chat with the technical staff only. Please use the chat only for technical issues. If you are disconnected unexpectedly, you may attempt to rejoin the meeting.

If disconnected while presenting testimony, you may be allowed to continue if time permits. Please note the House is not responsible for any bad Internet connections on the testifier's end. In the event of a network failure, it may be necessary to reschedule the hearing or schedule a meeting for decision making.

In that case, an appropriate notice will be posted. Please avoid using any trademark or copyrighted images. If you're using a Zoom background, please refrain from profanity or uncivil behavior. Such behavior may be grounds for removal from the hearing without the ability to rejoin. Finally, we have a new microphone system in the House conference rooms.

Microphones are now on the ceiling, so please be aware that any side conversations may be picked up. With that, we can head on into our agenda. So first up, we have House Bill 1602 relating to agriculture appropriates funds to establish one full time equivalent grant specialist position within the Department of Agriculture and Biosurch Security.

First up to testify, we have Agriculture and B Security.

Well, Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, Cedric Gates here on behalf of dab, DAB stands in strong support of this measure. We appreciate the author and we have our subject matter expert in the room. If you have any questions. Mahal, thank you.

Next we have Michael Munetaka Munekata. Sorry, Initiative.

Morning. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Micah Monikata here on behalf of Lupon Initiative. I will stand on our testimony in strong support of this measure. I think you know, we've come before this body multiple times over the last three years or so just emphasizing the need for us to go after federal funds.

We can't keep putting the pressure on the state to figure out how best to Fund us. At the end of the day. Agriculture always needs funding. So really having a body and a resource that can really go after those federal monies that are out there that Hawaii historically hasn't gone after is really important.

We have a body currently within the Department of Ag that has been doing exemplary work since about a year and a half, two years ago, privately funded last session, you guys funded her, General funded this current fiscal year and federal funded in the next. Unfortunately, we can't have her federal Fund the next fiscal year.

So we're really looking for General funds at $100,000 for her. That's the position Just, just to give some context here in this current and federal Administration where there's a lot of uncertainty around what's really available for Hawaii to go after. And a lot of cuts that's gone through with a lot of federal programs.

Our particular grant writing specialist in Department of Ag was able to secure $9 million in a year like this. So that's 90 times return on investment just right there. And this is in a tough year.

You know, historically some of the private sector has shown that it can bring in somewhere around the lines of above 100 times return on investment when it comes to grant writing and getting awards for Hawaii's agriculturalists. So we, we really do appreciate this Bill. We think that, you know, Leslie over here, she's, she's done great work.

She's already identified $54 million additionally to go after here in the next year. So again, it's, it's great to have this resource. It, it is prudent, responsible with state funds and we hope that you can. Support this moving forward. Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you.

So we have Lauren Zerbo, White Food Industry Association.

Good morning, chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, I'm Alexis Chapman for hfia. We stand on our testimony and support. Just to reiterate one of the points Micah made. There is tremendous return on investment for this position and it really benefits our entire food system. So we support and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you for your testimony. Next we have Brian Miyamoto, White Farm Bureau.

Good morning, chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. You have a written testament support. This is a farm Bureau priority. Has been a priority of ours for the past several years. I won't repeat the great testimony from that Ulupono guy, but I will repeat roi.

We heard hfia say it also. This should be a no brainer. This is new money. This is money from outside the state. That goes to help our state's farmers and ranchers in that community. We have someone in the position now, as you heard Mr. Munakata talk about.

If we don't Fund this position and we talk about assurances in agriculture all the time. If we don't Fund this position and if we don't give this person assurance that they can continue to be funded, there's a potential we could lose this individual and it goes somewhere else.

Maybe to another State Department, maybe to private, maybe to leave Hawaii in totality. That would be a terrible loss for Hawaii and for the ag sector. We encourage strong support of this measly or very small funding for that huge ROI that we have been seeing and anticipate continue seeing from this position.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Next we have Myung zero Local Food Coalition.

Good morning, Chair. Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Myung Oh here. On behalf of the local Food Coalition. And strong support, as the prior testifiers. Have echoed, we reiterate the same return on investment. I think that the current specialist creates this continuity and institutional knowledge as the years go by. So we would appreciate the state support.

And funding this position permanently. Thank you.

That's all I have for registered to testify in person or on Zoom. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure?

Thank you. Chair Hunter Hemblin. On behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. We. We also stand in strong support of this measure. I'll be submitting our belated written comments shortly, but we'd like to reiterate what has already been said in this room.

But added that additionally, in my own personal experience, Leslie has been not just an advocate for pursuing additional funding, but a proactive participant in a number of conversations across the agricultural sector. Not just understanding what the federal funding capacities are, but.

But being present in many of the discussions to better understand what the local needs are, which I think is not.

Since there was a previous person at the marketing branch had I personally witnessed the volume of proactive activity within the agricultural sector as a mechanism for bridging resources so it cannot be understated the value that she brings to the Department and the potential that she brings to the state. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure. Anyone on Zoom Seeing none. Members, any questions?

I have one. Chair for Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Good morning. Chair. Vice Chair. Members of the Committee. Sharenher, Department of Agriculture Chair.

Thank you.

Security.

That's a lot. Question in the request is this. It's civil service exempt. This position. Correct. I didn't.

May I elaborate on that, please? It is Civil Service permanent, but because the funding was so iffy, the Ag's Office determined that exempt is a more appropriate title until it becomes fully funded by General funds. So currently it's civil service exempt. Our intent was to be civil service General funded.

Okay. So that would include scheduled bargaining raises and stuff like that, merit, etc. Okay. Going forward, if it's funded that it has a continuity, it doesn't flatline.

Yes.

Good. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions? Seeing none. Let's move on to the next measure. Next up, we have House Bill 2246, relating to Agricultural Grant Administration. Creates an agricultural grant program and evolving fund for the purposes of grant application execution, reporting, and auditing to be administered by the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, effective July 1, 2026.

First up, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Once again, good morning, Chair, vice chair, Members of the Committee. We stand on our written submitted testimony. However, I would like to add a section to my—to the Bill—and we'll make this change in the future. The section I'd like to add is one that I've omitted and it's the appropriation clause.

The section would be, "There is appropriated out of the agricultural grant revolving fund the sum of blank or so much thereof as may be necessary for fiscal year '26-'27 for the Agricultural Grant Program." Also adding the sum appropriated shall be expended by the Department of Agriculture Biosecurity for the purposes of this act.

I'm going to add to this testimony by saying that already, we, you know, we've mentioned the return on investment. Leslie has been able to be awarded her grant. The grant that she submitted was funded at 8.89 million. The current NICRA, the Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement, is 12.5%. That puts about a million dollars into the General Fund.

What this Bill would do would be to take a percentage of that, insert it into the Fund so that she can use that, we can use that, the state can use that, for continual research. This particular grant that she has involves collaboration with all the industry groups.

It would allow her to do that with the funds that are in this grant to then increase the amount of funding we can get. 8.89 million, by the way, is identified as the largest amount that the state—that the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity has ever received for a federal grant in one lump sum.

So, she's doing great work. She needs this Fund. We need this Fund to put money in so that we can have access to administrative duties, travel even, and on behalf of seeking more funding. Thank you.

So, we have Nicole Galase, Hawaii Cattlemen's Council, on Zoom.

Thank you, Chair Chun, Vice Chair Kusch, Members of the Committee. My name is Nicole Galase. I'm testifying on behalf of the Hawaii Cattlemen's Council. We're in support of this Bill because federal grants are cumbersome, but this program will help more Hawaii producers get access to these funds when the Department administers them.

This small investment can help us get access to much more in federal funds rather than leaving them on the table or unused to go to other states. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support.

Next, we have...Local Food Coalition.

Thank you, Chair. We stand on our written testimony in support.

Next we have Hunter Hevlin, Hawaii Farmers Union.

Thank you, Chair. We'll stand on our written testimony in support.

Thank you very much. That's all I have who registered to testify in person or on Zoom. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? This may be one question, not really a question, request.

Is there a way I could get that amendment you requested in the appropriation language?

Say that again.

For the appropriation language, that section you requested, so I could get that in writing.

Is there a way to get it amended? Yes. Working with the AG's Office right now. Thanks.

Okay. Seeing no further questions. Let's move on to the next measure. Next up, we have House Bill 1707 relating to agriculture.

Establishes a local agriculture transportation cost reimbursement program within the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to reimburse eligible ranchers and farmers a portion of their costs to transport livestock, livestock products, agricultural commodities and certain supplies under certain conditions. Establishes a position to administer the program and appropriates funds. First up we have to testify is Nicole Galassi.

White Cattlemen's Council on Zoom.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Nicole Galassi. On behalf of the Hawaii Cattlemen's Council, we support this Bill. The state has a goal to increase local food production and transportation is a necessary part of that.

This reimbursement program for transportation of local agriculture will help producers with these high costs, especially when young brothers Inter Island state rates continue to rise steeply each time an increase takes place. We would appreciate the state's assistance with these costs as a way to support local food production. Mahalo. Thank you.

Next we have David Veltri, Young Brothers.

Hi, David Veltri. Appearing on behalf of Young Brothers, Associate General Counsel there. I'm sorry, Chris Nakagawa, who wrote the testimony, couldn't be here today. But we stand in strong support of this measure and we're available for any questions. Thanks.

Next we have Lauren Zirbel, White Food Industry Association.

Good morning again, Chair, vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm Alexis Chapman for hfia. We stand on our testimony in support of this measure and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on our written testimony supporting another Hawaii Farm Bureau Legislative Priorities Bills. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Myung 0h, Local Food Coalition. Thank you, Chair. The local food coalition stands on its written testimony in support of Farm Bureau's Bill.

Thank you. That's all I have. We registered to testify in person or online. Is there anyone else we should testify?

Thank you, Chair. Hunter Haviland. Still, on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union, we're in strong support of this measure. We had advocated over the past few years for a comparable program that would have provided support not just for producers, but also for food hubs and, to a limited extent, broadband distributors.

The costs of food transportation are incurred by many across the agricultural system.

And while we do support the measure as written, especially appreciating that it does not reproduce the very cumbersome USDA language of reimbursement, transportation, cost payment, we would also at least like the body to consider the addition of entities that focus specifically in local food, that being food hubs across the islands. Thank you for the opportunity.

Hello, Chair, vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Cedric Gates here on behalf of DAB. I believe we submitted testimony on HB 1707 in support. If you don't have it, we will forward it over to make sure your. Committee can read it. Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions?

I don't want. Chair, I'm not sure if this would be Department of Agriculture or maybe Young Brothers, but does anybody have kind of a ballpark idea what this might be? An annual cost?

I can tell you that the federal program, they have a bucket of money and then they percentage it out. Each farmer gets about. Maybe Nicole has a better idea of that, but anywhere between 17 and $2,000 a year, that's a ballpark. The total cost of it, I wouldn't be able to tell you.

8 to 12,000 total is a cap. So everybody can get as much as 8 to 12 cap. But percentage wise, they don't get that much.

I think it varies on your operations.

So it's a simple reimbursement program in that when the feds do it, they just ask the farmers to keep their receipts. From what I understand, a shoebox is fine. You keep all your receipts that. No, really, that are transportation related and input related. And then they take 10% of that.

And that they feel is the total percentage of transportation involved in the, in the process of producing food. So our program would be similar. There would be a cap like you give like making this up $500,000. And then farmers would then take 10% of their inter island costs and then submit it.

And then we would take percentages and divide it up.

Okay, so it's. It's only restricted to Inter Island transport or is it also include trucking to.

Ports or, you know, Inter Island and Intra Island. And the reason for that is you might be competing and double dipping. But the federal program, I'm going to ask for the. Is that right? Intra Island, Inter Island versus from the mainland to, from. We shouldn't.

That's right, the mainland.

The federal transportation cost reimbursement program on the federal level is to defray the cost of moving from the mainland to the states, geographically disadvantaged states. And so we would capture the, the cost within the state.

Yeah, got it. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Appreciate.

Is. Zero, you want young brothers, you said? I have. I can just add a couple of things. One, please. From the way this Bill is. zero, should I go here? Sorry.

From the way the Bill is drafted, it looks like the subsidy or the reimbursement that's being proposed in this Bill would be more than just water carrier transportation. It would be other modes of transportation of wells such as motor carriers. So I can't speak to those with respect to young brothers. What we track is local agriculture.

And now it's about 3.1% of our total revenues in 2024. That's the most relevant figure I can offer at this time. And our total revenue in 2024 was 177 million, so. So about 5.1. I'm not that good at math. I can do that in my head right now, but that's what I was.

Able to pull a little, little more. Yeah. 5.5. Okay, thank you. Things have changed a lot since 2024 as well. Just. Zero yeah, as well. But that's the best I can offer at the moment. But if I have something more. Have to follow up with you folks. Thank you. Yeah.

Okay. I Got a question for. Are you going to add something to that?

Thank you. Chair Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. I think chair her did clarify it is as young brothers did it is for transportation within the state, Inter Island, Intra Island. So ground, ocean and air.

And costs, again because we don't have all those costs, it's going to vary between based on your your farm and your production and where your markets are. But with a $25,000 cap and that's not including the food hubs and the aggregators, but just on the farmers, what do we have 6,500 farms now?

6,500.

6,500. 170 million or so. Okay, so I mean that would be the high end. Again, it wouldn't be that high but again there are caps here and It's I think 25% or $25,000, whichever is lesser of the two. So again it would vary depending on what type of operation it is.

And if you are just your markets in your community or your markets are between islands. So could vary quite a bit and we could try to calculate some of those numbers. Vice Chair. But again I don't think anybody has. Those exact numbers right now. I think the next Committee will be interested.

Yes.

Okay. I have a question about. So you know, I want to tighten this up because I really don't want to see this get abused. So for the startup and small scale farmers for demonstrating commercial intent, is there a way they could prove commercial intent so that they're actually. This is on page three lines.

Thank you. Chair Brown, Miyamotohoy Farm Bureau lines 11 and 12. When it's a new farmer or a small farmer demonstrating commercial intent, basically showing proof. I think there's several things that could be considered.

You know there is a requirement when you're transporting commodities of I believe it is a hundred dollars or 200 pounds, a Bill of lading and invoice some type of proof of sale that is actually a requirement already through the quality assurance Division. Get could be one here here in Honolulu.

Border water supply, water rates or even the counties have the property tax dedication some type of proof that you are a natural farming maybe a conservation or farm plan, even schedule F. I think there are different documents that can prove that you are farming. We agree with you. We don't want this abused.

We don't want people using or getting this subsidy when they shouldn't be ag policy. Be ag policy. So again equipping. Equip the the state or the Department with the tools necessary to verify. But this speaks so I don't know if we covered here but the registration program that's been discussed for farmers and ranchers.

But again I think there are possibilities or opportunities that bonafide farmers will have which will verify that they are farming some of like the schedule F for a new farmer. They may not even have one yet because they're not making any money yet.

But I think there are different options that the Legislature can put into the Bill that can help verify the bonafide farming nature of those operations.

Question Seeing none . Let's move on to the next measure. Next up we have House Bill 2216 relating to agricultural loans. Authorizes the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to package and sell a portion of its agricultural loan portfolio to permitted third parties. Appropriates funds out of the agricultural loan revolving Fund to increase its expenditure ceiling.

First up we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Thank you. Chair DAB stands on its written testimony and strong support of this measure here for any questions. Thank you.

Next we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii farm bureau. Thank you chair. The Hawaii farm bureau will silence within testimony and support.

That's all I have. We registered to testify in personnel online on this measure. Is there anybody else wishing the test finance measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing none. Let's move on to the next measure. Next up we have House Bill 2594 relating to agriculture.

Directs the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to conduct a study on insurance coverage for small agricultural producers. Requires a report to the Legislature appropriates farms. We have to testify for the Department of Agriculture Agriculture and b security law.

Chair DAB stands on its written testimony in strong support of this measure. We're here for any questions. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau was down on its written testimony in support. Right.

Frmer's union stands on its testimony and support.

Thank you. Next we have Hunter Hevelin from Farmer's union.

Thank you. That's all. I have to register to testify in person or online. Is there any else anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing okay, I'm going to ask DAB. I'm going to ask a question for DAB.

So I just wanted to follow up on your testimony that may need more time to do the report. Do you have a like a recommendation on how much. How much longer you would need? Just because if January 1, 2027 might be too short to be able to. Get all the information you need.

Two years perhaps and we would be working with the historical records that the Farm Bureau and Farm Bureau used to offer insurance. And so with that, I'm going to say two years. So maybe January 1, 2028. Now we might be done. You know, we might be done.

It's just the definitions and the non compete with the private industry. That sort of thing might be, might be difficult to do in one year.

Okay, thank you. Okay, let's move on to the next measure. Except we have House Bill 2595 relating to regional agriculture and food production. Establishes the regional Agricultural Feasibility and Food Systems Production Studies working group within the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to provide coordinated region specific agricultural production and crop feasibility analysis across the state.

All right.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, let's move on to the next measure, except we have House Bill 2595, relating to regional agriculture and food production. Establishes the Regional Agricultural Feasibility and Food Systems Production Studies working group within the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to provide coordinated region-specific agricultural production and crop feasibility analysis across the state.

Requires reports to the Legislature, appropriates funds, repeals June 30th, 2028. First up to testify, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Thank you, Chair. DAB stands on its written testimony in strong support of this measure. Here for any questions.

Next, we have Phyllis Shimabukuro-Geiser, University of Hawaii.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members. CTAHR stands on its written testimony...

Thank you. Next, we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair. HFB will stand on his written testimony in support. Currently, we're using abbreviations.

Next up is Hunter Hevlin, Hawaii Farmers Union.

Hunter Hevlin on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. We'll send out our written testimony in support. However, would add, I think, an important maybe historical valence to this. As written, this really seems to operate off the belief that state government can alone and maybe even primarily address majority of these issues.

Looking historically at programs like the territorial market program in the early 1900s, the Hawaiian Produce Market in the mid-1940s, the Produce Information Exchange in the 1950s, and so forth, what these efforts, when they were successful, did is brought together industry in both production and demand and government to try and solve these issues.

And while it does say that this body may consult with the private sector, I think maybe making that a little bit more of a requirement would be advisable. We currently have a whole slew of assessments and working groups and so forth. And having those in seats of decision making power within state governments is critical.

But meaningful and broad participation and engagement from the private sector, both from the production side and the demand side is key. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Next we have Sherry Manor, Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Julian Kiaba, on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce Hawaii, and we stand in support.

Thank you. That's all I have registered to testify in person or on Zoom.

Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Vice Chair.

For Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. Thinking of this in unwieldy sized committees and working groups, did you have a number of participants on in mind for a working group like this or?

Based on what Hunter just said, it's probably going to grow. Industry is not well represented in the group. So, to answer your question, 10 is a good number. 11 is better. Odd numbers are better. That would be good.

And with that many people, do you feel like relatively quick progress can be made because you have—if this passed in July, that would give you five months.

We'll do our best. I think with the number of milestones, I think we can, we can go through that, not making it broad like some of the working groups have been bewildered because of the nebulousness of the—you know what I mean?

Yeah, yeah, that good definition. Okay.

Skip milestones.

That's good. Thank you.

Any other questions? Seeing none. Let's move on to the next measure. Next up, we have House Bill 2155, related to agricultural statistics. Requires the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to revitalize and enhance the Agriculture—Agricultural—Statistics Program to collect data on local agricultural interests, appropriate funds. First up to testify we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Good morning again, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. The Department stands in strong support of this Bill. We were part of the downsizing that affected the entire state in 2008. The entire Statistics Branch was abolished and the farmers found themselves to be...and we did as well. Planting decisions, what's coming in, what's moving between islands.

If eggs are moving from Honolulu to Maui, then the Maui farmers would start having eggs. I mean those kinds of data driven decisions was missing. I think bringing this back would help the state grow double food production in a very data driven science need base. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next, we have Phyllis Shimabukuro-Geiser, University of Hawaii.

Aloha. CTAHR stands on its written testimony offering comments.

Next, we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. And next, we have Hunter Hevlin, Hawaii Farmers Union.

Thank you, Chair. While rows of crops are important to agriculture, rows of data have a similar importance and the absence of clear understanding of our agricultural sector has long hobbled development of our industries here.

It cannot be overstated the impact of producers not having clear understanding of market price of demand of local transportation volumes which we've collected consistently for decades. It is easier for me to tell you what we produced and how it moved 70 years ago than seven.

This is a critical piece of having a robust agricultural sector and one that, as the Bill highlights, is currently being eroded at the federal level, which we have since 2008, and nine cuts long relied on and turned to, at our own cost.

So, in housing, a lot of this work and for myself to have fellows fellow spreadsheet livers. At the Department of Agriculture, I think the manifold benefits that can come from this should not be understated. Thanks.

That's all I have who registered to testify in person or on Zoom. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing none.

Let's go, I have one.

Okay, Vice Chair.

Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity again, sorry. We'll just slide down a little closer next time. How many positions were you looking at and did you have any ideas or thoughts on a global cost on the statistics program to revitalize it?

The technology today, I think we can do a lot better. It used to be people time taking notes. Two people would be good. I think the Bill asked for two. And the cost, the technology might be expensive, so, I would say not, not with personnel, maybe to buy the program would be about $500,000 to purchase the software.

We can do it the old-fashioned way, you know, and tap into the current system. But I think if we want to really get into the AI basis, just tap into everything we can, I think we're going to estimate 500 highly. What would you say?

So, like 800 start and 400 ongoing?

That's very fair.

Something like that?

Yeah, but the data, as Hunter said, very well said, the data is so precious, you know.

And anybody who does grants may like that?

Yeah. Let's see. There's a grant for that. Yeah.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Any other questions? Seeing none. Let's move on to the next measure. Next up, we have House Bill 2113 relating to natural resources, who creates funds for the removal of vegetation from the Kainahola Stream. One registered testifier. That's by the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Thank you, Chair. The Department stands on its written comments. I just want to clarify that the reason why we offer these comments is because the property is in DOT's jurisdiction and we ask that that it's added into the Bill. Thank you.

Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing none. Let's move on to the next measure.

Next up, we have House Bill 2207 relating to invasive species. Requires the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to establish rules allowing the sale and distribution of fine mesh nets, including monofilament netting in the state to protect plants from the coconut rhinoceros beetle. First up to testify, we have Patrick Chi, DLNR.

Morning, Chair...DLNR. We stand on testimony in support of the measure.

Thank you. Next, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Thank you, Chair. DAB stands on its written testimony in support of this measure. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next, we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. Next we have Hunter Hevlin, Hawaii Farmers Union.

Farmers Union stands on its testimony in support.

Thank you. Next, we have Angela Young from CARES on Zoom. Not present. Okay, that's all I have who registered to testify in person or online. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions?

I'm sorry. Such a problem. Rob Hauff from Invasive Species Council.

Morning.

Morning. So, I'm guessing that there's a prohibition on fine mesh nets because of the throw net possibility. Are these—would this kind of a blanket law allow for that proliferation of illegal throw net or are these pretty fine insect nets for CRB, like, specific to that trade?

I mean, I don't have a sense of like, are they sold in coils or you're buying a throw net and you're cutting off the weights and putting it in your coconut tree.

So, yes, these nets could potentially be used that way, but because of the way they would be regulated by Department of Ag for this specific purpose, our Division of Aquatics didn't have any concerns. My understanding is that that ban for fishing will still be in effect and enforced.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions? So now let's move on to the next measure. Next up, we have House Bill 1832 relating to aquaculture. Requires establishment of a biological aquatic risk based framework for assessment and approval of aquatic livestock importation and movement.

Authorizes the Division of Animal Industry of the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to adopt rules, species risk categorization, tiered biocontainment standards, pre per arrival disease testing and interagency coordination procedures. Establishes an interagency working group. Requires development of species specific risk matrices. Interagency working group coordination with automatic permit approval timelines and performance performance accountability. Establishes an implementation timeline.

Appropriates monies. First up to testify, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Thank you. Chair DAB stands on its written testimony in strong support of this measure. Here for Any questions?

Thank you. Next we have Brian Nielsen, Department of Land and Natural Resources. Present. Next we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Jen. The Hawaii Farm Bureau was down on this. Written testimony in support.

Great. Thank you. That's all. I have registered to testify in person online on this measure. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Seeing non Members? Any questions? I have a question for DAB.

Thanks, sir. My question is—so, in testimony, there was a concern brought up about folks who already have an existing permit. So, my question is, how would this new framework impact people already holding a permit for aquaculture?

I don't think it impacts them but let me call up Todd. It does not.

So they'd be grandfathered in or?

Todd Lowe, Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture Development. Yeah, the idea would be that the existing permits would begin and other than we're not going backwards, this is more forward.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, actually I have one more question related to that. Sorry. On that same line of thinking and not being familiar with the old permit regime compared to the new and not knowing the nuances between the two, do you foresee any issues?

You know, if, if an existing legacy permit holder is doing a species and a new player comes in doing the same species, is there going to be a competitive advantage because they have less regulatory oversight because of the newer permit or compared to the old permit? You see what I'm getting at?

I just trying to see are we creating an unfair marketplace between our aquaculture producers?

Yeah, I don't foresee that. I think we'd have to take things in a case-by-case basis. You know, permits have to be renewed. So, eventually, everybody would be going back to going to the—I guess we call this the new system or the revised system. So, there might be some lag in the timing, but we would—I think we'd have to look at it case by case and see. We want to be as fair as we can.

Okay. So, there could be some latitude from the administrative level to recognize if some unforeseen?

Right. This, this system is really going to be designed to help produce, help, help grow ag. Right? Yeah.

So, understood.

To lean forward on.

Yeah. Thank you.

Seeing no further questions. Let's move on to the next measure. Next up, we have House Bill 2015 relating to coffee labeling. Clarifies the labeling and advertising requirements for coffee that is grown and processed in the state, defines regional origin. First up we have to test—to testify—is Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Thank you, Chair. DAB stands in support of this measure. Here for any questions.

Also had testimony from Richard Cohen from DAB on Zoom.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm here just to assist the Chair to answer any questions regarding the Bill and we stand in support of this Bill which would help clarify the enforcement necessary from the Measurement Standards Branch. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. And next we have Suzanne Schreiner, Kona Coffee Farmers Association, on Zoom. Not present. Okay. That's all I have registered to testify in person on zoom. Is there anyone else wishing to testify?

Thank you, Chair. Hunter Hevlin, on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. We testify in support of this measure. It's an important housekeeping to clarify some of the provisions that were hard fought over recent years to ensure that there is effective labeling, and which is critical to both industry and consumer protection.

I think we would stand as a part of the amendment that Suzanne Schreiner put forward as well. Thank you.

Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing none. Let's move on to our last measure. So, we have House Bill 2152 relating to dog attacks. Clarifies owner liability and increases penalties and enforcement mechanisms for dog attacks on livestock. First up we have to testify is Nicole Galase, Hawaii Cattleman's Council.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Nicole Galase, on behalf of the Hawaii Cattleman's Council. We support this measure to clarify owner liability and increase the penalties in situations when dogs are attacking livestock. In every county, we have incidents of dogs attacking livestock. This is problematic on many levels.

It shows the prevalence of wild dogs, as well as domestic dogs whose owners do not keep them under control. In either case, the dogs attacking livestock are obviously detrimental to the sheep and cattle that the rancher cares for. But it's also a safety issue for our humans. When unchecked, the dogs can be aggressive.

And in all cases that I've heard, the livestock were killed for sport, not for a food source. This is why so many can be killed at once.

And even if the animals are not killed, they're either injured, die later, or they become skittish and nervous, which is something that livestock producers aim to avoid when practicing low stress animal handling. So, we thank you for introducing this Bill and bring it to a hearing. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next, we have Stephanie Kendrick, Hawaii Humane Society.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Hawaii Humane submitted testimony in opposition to this measure, but I want to really be clear that we support the intent of protecting livestock from these kinds of attacks and we've offered the Committee some amendments that would address our issues with dogs being falsely accused.

For example, there's a provision that would allow dogs not immediately and obviously engaged in an attack to be destroyed if the owner thought that they may have been engaged in a prior attack. We have a real problem with that.

We are animal law enforcement so we see that a lot of dogs look alike, and it takes some time and process to figure out what dogs might actually be involved in an incident like this.

But we are absolutely in support of the intent of this measure, and we hope the Committee will consider our amendments so that we can be fully in support.

I also wanted to really acknowledge the testimony by Kahala Farms, which was recently involved in a terrible incident where 11 of their goats were killed by a single dog, which is mind boggling. Their thoughtful testimony suggesting an expedited process for hearing dangerous dog cases is something that we would wholeheartedly support.

We are involved in trying to prosecute these cases on a regular basis, and the delays are very frustrating to the community and to our officers.

So, if the Committee and the legal minds have an idea for ways that we can do that and expedite an actual judicial process, that's something we would be very interested in discussing and supporting.

I will also point out that there's a Senate Bill coming later today that will be heard that deals with hunting dogs and prohibiting their training to attack animals.

The Kahala Farms case is still very much under investigation, but at least in most of the cases of these kinds of attacks prosecuted on Oahu, it has turned out to be hunting dogs who were involved and specifically hunting dogs who've been trained to attack prey.

So, if we can get that Senate Bill over to you guys, we're hoping that that would have some interest and support from the Committee as well. Thank you for the time to testify and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Next, we have Roland Yartzoff, Hawaii Sheep and Goat Association, on Zoom.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and Member of the Committee. I had submitted written testimony. It stands. I am prepared to answer any questions. I did play a role in the early drafting of this proposed statute, so I would gladly answer questions if there are any. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support.

All right, thank you very much. Okay, that's all I have who registered to testify in person or on Zoom. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure?

Thank you, Chair. Hawaii Farmers Union just offer some comments. We note that this builds upon the definition recently adopted of a habitual agricultural crime perpetrator testimony, when those measures that put that into our statute were being put forward by public defenders' offices highlighted the questionable nature of implementation and potentially harsh penalties associated with that.

And while as somebody who's lost my own livestock to dogs over the years, we view it as critical to support and protect agricultural operations but would wonder if there are other mechanisms to do so, particularly as jurisprudence may be yet to be seen on top of that classification.

Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing none. We're going to recess to get ready for next session. Take a short recess.

Okay.

We're reconvening our 9:30 agenda for the Committee on Agriculture and Food Systems for decision making. So, first up, we have House Bill 1602 relating to agriculture. Recommendation of the Chair is to—we're going to pass out a House Draft 1 and we're just going to defect the date to 7-1-3000. Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. Next, we have House Bill 2246 relating to Agricultural Grant Administration. Recommendation of Chair is to pass out of House Draft 1. So, for the annual report in paragraph B, we are going to put that the report is due 20 days prior to the completing of each regular session.

Also going to adopt the language provided by DAB for the appropriation and we're going to change the effective date to July 1, 3000, and technical amendments for clarity, consistency, and style. Members, any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, Members. Next up, we have House Bill 1707 relating to agriculture. Recommendation is to pass out of House Draft 1. So, on page 3, line 12, for startups and small-scale farmers, just going to change the word demonstrating to require proof of commercial intent and then defect the date to July 1, 3000.

Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none. Vice Chair for vote.

[Roll Call]

Next, we have House Bill 2216 relating to agriculture loans. Recommendation of the Chair is to pass out of house draft one, defect the effective date to July 1, 3000. Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none. Vice Chair.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. Next, we have House Bill 2594 relating to agriculture. Recommendation Chair, of the Chair, is to pass out a House Draft 1. So, on page 2, lines 14, we're going to change the due date from 2027 to 2028, and that's on page 2, line 14. And then, we're going to defect the date to 7-1-3000.

Any questions, comments, or concerns, members? Seeing none. Vice Chair.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. Next, we have House Bill 2595, relating to regional agriculture and food production. Recommendation of the Chair is to pass on House Draft 1. We are going to defect the date to July 1, 3000. Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none. Vice Chair.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. Next up, we have 2155, relating to agricultural statistics. Recommendation of the Chair is to pass a House Draft 1. We're going to defect the date to July 1, 3000. Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none.

Vice Chair for vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on HB 2155. Chair's recommendation is pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Is there any reservations or nay? Seeing none. Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next up, we have House Bill 2113, relating to natural resources. Recommendation is to pass out House Draft 1. So we're going to take the recommendation by DAB and change the expending agency to the Department of Transportation, blank out the appropriation and put the amount in the committee report, and defect the date to July 1st, 3000. Questions, comments, or concerns, Members? Seeing none. Vice Chair for vote.

Okay. Voting on HB 2113. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any reservations or nay? Seeing none. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Next we have House Bill 2207, relating to invasive species. So the recommendation of the Chair is to pass out a House Draft 1. We are going to take the recommended language from the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity and the testimony referencing applicable federal and state laws and defect the date to July 1st, 3000 and technical amendments for clarity, consistency, and style. Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none. Vice Chair.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on HB 2207. Chair's recommendation pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any reservations or nay votes? Seeing none. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next we have House Bill 1832, relating to aquaculture. The recommendation of the Chair is to pass out a House Draft 1. So on page 9, lines 7 through 9, we're going to put in a deadline of 20 days prior to the convenient of each regular session. We're going to blank out the appropriation and insert that amount into the committee report and defect the date to July 1st, 3000. Any questions, comments, or concerns, Members? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Okay, voting on HB 1832. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Is there any reservations or nay? Seeing none. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Members. Next we have House Bill 2015, relating to coffee labeling. The recommendation of the Chair is we're going to pass out a House Draft 1. We're going to take the recommended amendments by the Coffee Association, and we're going to change the "and" on page 4, line 12, and page 5, line 1, back to "or" and change the effective date to July 1, 3000. Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Okay, voting on HB 2015. Chair's recommendation is to pass with the amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any reservations or nay? Seeing none. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Members. And our final bill, House Bill 215, relating to dog attacks. Okay, so the recommendation of the Chair, we're going to pass out House Draft 1. First, we're going to add clarifying language to the amendments in 14274 Section 3, that the land and premises pertains only to the agricultural district classified under Chapter 205.

So we're really trying to kind of focus this on where the issue is and not in residential areas where maybe a dog might get loose inside chasing someone's chickens. We're really just looking at this from the agriculture. So I want to thank Vice Chair for working on this bill.

Next, we're going to remove the phrase in paragraph one, "persistently pursuing or harassing," and then remove the provisions in paragraph two on page four, lines one through four. We're going to change the effective date to July 1, 3000 for further discussion.

And I would like to note in the committee report the issues raised by the Hawaii Insurance Council on the liability provisions and just have the next committee consider, you know, their testimony on those issues. Any questions, comments, or concerns, Members? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Okay. Voting on HB 2152. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any nays or reservations? Seeing none. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Members. We are adjourned.

All right. Good morning, everyone. It is Wednesday, February 11th, 11:30am. We are in Conference Room 325. We're here with the Committee on Energy and Environmental Protection for decision making on two measures that were previously heard.

First up, we have House Bill 1983, relating to natural resources. Really appreciate the intent behind this bill. I think we learned a lot by having a hearing and reading the testimony that was submitted and need to come back and work on this prior to the next session and maybe come back with a better proposal.

But for the time being, I'm going to defer this measure. And then moving on to House Bill 1928, relating to deposit beverage container recycling. This is the bill that creates a producer responsibility system for our deposit beverage container recycling program.

There's a number of amendments to this bill, so I'll just start reading through them. First of all, we're going to clarify some of the definitions, including the definition of dealer, De minimis producer, producer, reverse vending machine, and deposit beverage container.

We're going to add a new section including some of the language from the current section 342gq that will establish redemption rate targets and convenience standards in statute that producers are responsible for meeting.

We will clarify that each producer must register with the state and be responsible to submit a plan or may create a PRO themselves or with other producers for the purposes of meeting the targets laid out in statute. We will, for the language relating to the deposit initiation, we're going to revert back to language more similar to what's in existing statute as this is more clear.

We will add to the PRO plan requirement for the plan from the PROs to state how it will meet or exceed convenience standards and redemption targets that we're going to define in the new section we're creating and also how it will prevent fraud and ensure compliance.

And then we will add to the departmental approval criteria whether the plan sufficiently addresses internal procedures and actions to prevent fraud and address and report non-compliance and whether the plans to meet the targets and convenience standards are adequate. We will add a new section for enforcement, add a new section for third party audits.

We will add a blank date to clarify that the existing law would not be repealed upon the effective date of the bill. So we'll leave that blank for now. But we need to do work on a transition plan so that we have a new plan in place before existing law is repealed.

We will add a provision that once a program is established, some amount of the special fund balance should be transferred to the PRO for unredeemed containers and for program operation and improvement. And a number of technical amendments for clarity, consistency, and style. We will note in the committee report specifically that we know there's a lot of work still needed on several elements of this bill.

Especially in figuring out the transition plan and the timing of all the steps that need to happen to achieve this transition. And we will defect the date to the year 3000 and move this forward for further consideration. Members, any discussion? Oh, thank you. All right. Seeing no discussion. Vice Chair.

On House Bill 1928, Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. [Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation has been adopted.

All right. And we are adjourned.