House Standing Committee on Education

Right now, convening the joint committees on education and Higher Education. It is Tuesday, February 10, 2026. Few minutes after 2:00pm here in Conference Room 309. We have two separate agendas that we're going to hear as a joint Committee. There's a 2pm agenda for House Bill 1676 where higher ed is the lead.

And we have a Bill on agenda at 2:01pm where EDN is the lead, Hospital 8 and 11. So we will do this in order. Hospital 1676, this is relating to artificial intelligence. It establishes an AI and education task force to develop guidelines and recommendations for the use of AI in safe public education.

Requires a superintendent of education and CFO of UH to receive certain documentation from a vendor of an AI tool before the procurement or use of the AI tool and appropriate funds. Up first, we have the Department of Education providing comments.

Good afternoon. Chair Garrett, Vice Chair Amato, Chair Woodson, Vice Chair La Chica. I'm Heidi Armstrong, Department of Education. The Department stands on its written testimony which supports the intent of H Bill and, and I'd also like to share some additional comments that the Department is very supportive in being an active partner in the Artificial Intelligence and Education task force.

As described in this Bill. The Department is advancing AI literacy and instructional readiness, empowering teachers and students to use these tools effectively. And should the Committee wish to hear more about our specific initiatives, I have with me Dr. Winston Sakurai, who's been recognized as the national Digital Principal of the Year.

And he's also leading our push toward the adoption of AI digital citizenship and innovation and technology driven pedagogy. Thank you for this opportunity.

Thank you, Heidi. Up next, in person, Public Charter School Commission.

Aloha, Chair Garrett, Chair Woodson, and Members of the Committee. My name is PJ Foehr. I'm here on behalf of Dr. Ed Note, the State Public Charter School Commission. We stand in our submitting testimony in support of HB 1676 and look forward to working with the committees and other agencies moving this forward.

Okay, thank you very much. Via Zoom, the University of Hawaii.

Good afternoon. Chairs Garrett and Woodson. Vice Chairs Amato and Machito. Members of the Committee, Garrett Yoshimi, Vice President for IT and Secret Information Officer of the University. The University of Hawaii will stand on its written testimony in support of the intent of HB 1676 and respectful comments. Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Garrett. That's all that we have scheduled to testify on this measure. Is there anyone else in the room wishing to do so?

House of 1676, if not Members, please Note, we have testimony and support from the UH, Professional Assembly, comments from HGEA and support from a few individuals, as well as comments and testimony opposition from one individual. Members, any questions? House Bill 61676. I have a question for DOE.

DOE, please. Thank you for being here for this Bill that you, you indicated in your testimony that the DOE already had a AI and Education Task force and it produced a report. Is that correct? Yes. And what were some of the findings in that report?

One of the things that we were able to do. Winston Sakurai, Director at the office of Kirkland we were very fortunate as we were writing our strategic plan for the board to include artificial intelligence in there.

And one of the things that we found is that this emergency technology, it's going to take a lot of time and management to be able to produce quality outputs from that. And we're constantly even like weekly meeting to kind of update some of the guidance and provide additional support to schools.

I think one of the major things with this is that it is a thing that we need to protect students privacy and our employees privacy. We need to make sure that we are training teachers best use it to support the students.

And I think the main thing is that it is something that needs to be available for all of our students to allow them to be competitive in this ever changing environment.

So you already interfaced like standards, standards for the curriculum that you're going to be using.

Regarding AI, we actually are embedding into all of our curricular pieces. We provided General guidance. We're one of the first states to be able to do that for our students, not the first one, because we want to make sure that we had everything in place.

A lot of states that were early adopters had to revise them to meet the privacy standards and meet the standards of, of educating students. But we do have those guidance in place for employees, also for students. And we actually have online modules for teachers of how to incorporate that into their current classroom activities. Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Yes, go ahead please.

What mechanism do you have in place of reports on potentially harmful or continued, unintentional, like continued engagement that might be distracting from what it's intended for? Because we want students to use it if it has something with their current learning, but if it goes on with other things. Mechanism or controls?

Yeah, that is super important. I remember As a teacher 25 years ago, I had a student was doing something that wasn't necessarily appropriate in the classroom and we were able to identify that through our network of systems. Our IT Department is excellent. And they actually monitor a lot of these things. We can't catch every single thing.

But we do have filters in place. We do have monitoring devices. And most of the time we have a pilot program through Magic School AI. It actually will email the teachers and administrators if there's something in there, whether it's suicidal ideation, whether it's some harm to themselves or any other activities that can be disruptive.

Again, not 100%, because no filters are. But we take that very seriously. And one of the things is that our students know that we monitor. And so they are very reluctant to do that within our current network or our devices. And the education has to extend beyond that.

So students know that even though when they are home, when parents are around, that they shouldn't be doing these things as well.

And does this. What happens when it's on their personal devices? Also, can the Department provide an update on where we're at with the cell phone ban policy?

I could speak to.

Go ahead.

I'll just speak to what happens. Usually either a teacher or the administrator of the school will receive a notification. What will happen is most times there will be a discussion with the students. Oftentimes there will also be discussion with the parents of what's happened.

There might be restrictions on use of the network or device and then further consequences through our Chapter 19 policy could take.

And. And we do have safeguards if the personal device is accessing our network. Okay. Okay. And then as regarding the cell phone man, that will go. That is, the board is creating a cell phone policy, and we expect that to be heard at an upcoming board meeting. And we'll know what the policy says.

Once the board confirms that.

Thank you.

Questions. Okay, Members, any other questions? House Bill 1676. If not, I just have a few more for the DOE. Thank you for explaining some of the highlights of that readiness roadmap that you folks have prepared. And I recognize you folks have issued guidelines or guidance for both students and teachers.

I guess what I was trying to do when I introduced this Bill is look at more of a way to integrate AI into the curriculum and look at it from a pedagogical standpoint. So to what extent have you trained teachers on how to use AI in the classroom?

We have both synchronous and asynchronous programs. Over 10,000 of our educators have been trained live and in person. We also have an online module. I think it's one of the first in the nation to allow for all of our employees to learn how to use AIs. In.

In their work, whether it's office people or whether it's in the classroom with our instructors. We have a AI Summit that we have every year, which is pretty awesome to have educators come and learn from the best professionals that are using AI. And then also we have our Computer Science Summit, which is just coming up next week.

These are all opportunities for them to learn and grow. We have CTE pathways, including introduction of artificial intelligence, coming up. We are integrating standards into our computer science program. We want artificial intelligence or technology to be ubiquitous, like the air we breathe.

And the Department feels that this is a very important thing for students to know and able to do, so they can be successful.

Okay, so the 10,000 students that are teachers that have been trained, how many are actively using AI in the classroom today?

You know, I don't have the exact number because there are a lot of different tools that are out there. We had a discussion with OpenAI chat, GTP, and they actually said we have the highest usage in the nation per capita of educators. They actually track that information.

They wouldn't release the exact data because that's proprietary to them, but they did show us some charts, and they had Hawaii at the top. So we can see if we can gather some more information on that. I know our. Our team at OCID does track on the teacher side.

I would have to talk with other offices to see if that's available.

Okay. And then similarly for the students, is AI literacy like a core part of the DOE curriculum? Having them prepared not just in terms of, like, ethical use or acceptable use, but actually engaging with it. Is that built in it?

It's actually currently within our technology guidelines. It's something that we want them to be a part of. The Legislature was very supportive of us having computer science in every school. We are trying to integrate the computer science standards. Computer science standards, which are going to be revised even this summer to incorporate more artificial intelligence.

And hopefully that's something that we can take to the board and they will adopt those current standards. But yes, it is something that, again, is evolving, and we're trying to use the best practices. We have been involved with some qualities, national standards of graders, and we will hopefully be able to incorporate their best practices into.

Currently, it's embedded within our computer science standards.

Okay, so it's not necessarily as part of other subject matter. Are you looking at just from the narrow lens of computer science, or are you looking at all subjects?

We actually want it to be part of all subjects. Just how we use technology in the classrooms. Google Doc at one time was just an emerging technology and we're using that now email as well.

One of the great things that's happened over the last few years is our students are more comfortable and our teachers are more comfortable with technology. And we want that to be something that's useful for them, that saves them time but actually allows them to grow and to explore more of their market.

Okay, in what sense? From what better word? This. To what extent are you folks looking at this? Looking at this from a digital equity standpoint for rural schools or neighbor island schools that might not have these kinds of resources?

Yeah, that is, that is super important. If education is the first great equalizer, technology is a second and having access to that for all of our, all of our schools is going to be important. The infrastructure needs to be in place which I know our technology office does a really good job with that.

The tools, thankfully a lot of them are web based and that's where you don't need special programs, you don't need high end equipment. Chromebooks can actually do the same thing and having access to your.

Okay, thank you very much Members. Any other questions?

If not we will call the short recess recess.

Reconvening the joint committees on higher education and education on House Bill 1676 the chairs haven't confirmed. What we'd like to do is defer this Bill to Friday February 13th.

We just posted a 2pm agenda for higher education so we'll tack it on to the end of that one chair would like to work on HD1 taking a look at the composition of the task force. Also taking a second look at the procurement standards.

I know there were some questions regarding that so we'll consider eliminating that section altogether and a few other changes as well too. So Members what we'll do is work on HD1 and circulate it prior to the Friday hearing so you have a chance to look at it at that point. So with that we will defer, adjourn.

The 2pm agenda.

Is the 10th.

It's about 2:16pm and we are accomplishing 3091 Bill on the agenda HB18. This. Is with regards to student repayments Student repayment program first we have up is DOE operating testimony providing comments.

Good morning or good afternoon Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the Committee's. Sean Beacons Assistant Superintendent for the Office of Talent Management to testifying on behalf of the Department we stand on a written top testimony providing comments and are available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you for being here.

Next we have school commission offering testimony and support in person.

Aloha Chair Woodson and Chair Garrett Members of the Committee. PJ Foehr on behalf of the state Public Charter School Commission we stand on our submitted testimony in support of HB 1811 and look forward to working with the Committee says it moves forward. Thank you for your testimony.

Next we have University of Hawaii comments.

Good afternoon Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the Committee. Debbie Halbert, Vice President for Academic Strategy. We stand in our written testimony with comments. Happy to answer questions if I can.

Thank you. Thank you for being here. Next we have HSTA or excuse me, we have the Hawaii Teachers Standards Board offering testimony support in person.

I'm Mitzie Higa speaking for Hawaii Teacher Standards Board. Thank you Chair and two Chairs, Chair Woodson and Chair Garrett. We stand in support of 1811. We look the Hawaii Teacher Standards Board speaking for on behalf of the board they support quality teachers in our schools and as we know student loan burden is a high cost of living.

And so we're looking for any way and we see that we have heard this has worked well for the Hawaii Health Care Education Loan. So we would like to help our teachers with this as well. So we're going to support.

Thank you for being here. Next we have HSTA offering testimony of support in person.

Hello my Chair and Vice Chair Sarah Laffin on behalf of HSTA On Friday we had lobby day where we brought a bunch of teachers to the Capitol and all of you received these beautiful books. The first in this book is Fighting the teacher short. What a great way to do that by loan repayment.

I know myself when I was looking. I've been in Title 1 classrooms for 21 years. In my education career when I was looking at transferring schools it was important to me to make sure I kept that Title 1 designation because it helped me excuse some of my student loans previously so I actually have my undergrad paid off.

We know it would make it more attractive for other people to get into profession. We know it's helped nursing. I will also just say at a board of Ed meeting recently that the Castle foundation shared that only 2% of Hawaii's high school graduates wanted to be teachers. And how do we make it more attractive?

And by paying off those loans would be a great way to do it. So please support.

Thank you so much. Next we have Democratic Party of Hawaii Education Caucus offering testimony and support written testimony. We have individual Testimony testimony perhaps seven people all in support. Anyone else? HB 1811. Seeing none. Is there any questions? Any questions? Seeing none. Quick recession.

Okay, thank you very much for convening for decision making on one Bill, HB 1811. This is with regards to loan repayment programs and educators Members. The Recommendation is that HC1 instead of having multi multi tier. Instead of having a two tier or a multi tier disbursement system, Members will collapse it.

And the recommendation is to have disbursement up to 25,000 upon completion of five years of service. That's found on page three under Section two. And then we will simply have technical non sub amendments and defect in the date to 7-1-3000. Questions? Comments, concerns? Vice Chair for the vote, please. Education Committee.

Thank you, Chair. Members voting On House Bill 1811, Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair both aye. Representative Amato. Aye. Representative Evslin. Aye. Representative Garrett. Aye.

Representative Kapela. Aye. Representative Kila. Aye. Representative Olds. Aye. Representative Muraoka. Aye.

Representative Sousa. Aye. Thank you, Chair. Recommendations adopted.

Thank you, Members. Higher Education Same recommendation. Any discussion? If not Vice Chair for the vote, please.

Thank you Chair. Voting on HB1811 Chair's recommendation passed with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote. Aye. Representative Evslin. Aye.

Representative Kapela. Aye. Representative Kila. Aye,pardon. Representative La Chica. Aye. Representative Olds. Aye.

Representative Woodson. Aye. Representative Muraoka. Aye. Representative Souza. Aye. Thank you, Chair. Your recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Good afternoon. This is your Committee on Education. Today's date is the 10th of February. It's about 2:30pm and we are in Conference Room 309. We have about 16 bills on the agenda. We're going to ask if actually you'll stand on your testimony unless you're you feel compelled to testify, please come up and do that.

You're welcome to do that. That's recommendation. And to accommodate the DOE, we're going to take some of the bills out of order. We're going to start off with the student meal proposals. So we'll start with HB 1561. We're going to start with 1561. So first up we have.

The Charter School Commission offering testimony and support in person. Charter School commission stands on its surveillance. Thank you so much. Next, certifier for HB 1561 is the Department of Health offering comments in person. Next we have HSTA offering testimony and support in person.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair. We'll go ahead and stand in our testimony.

Mahalo. Next we have Parents and Children Together offering testimony support in person. Okay. We have the Democratic Party of Hawaii Education Caucus in person in support. Different today, but we're going to stay on our testimony. Thank you for being here. Next we have Hawaii Public Health Institute offering testimony support. I will stand in support. Thank you.

Next we have White Appleseed offering testimony and support in person.

Hi, Chair Woodson, Vice Chair La Chica, Members. Daniela Spoto with White Appleseed. I will keep my comments brief, but I wanted to just point out a couple of amendments. We stand in strong support of this measure.

The reason that we wanted to respect these amendments, the First Amendment in our testimony would ensure that charter schools are treated the same as other public schools schools if and when those income eligibility limits are expanded in the future so they're not left behind. Again, if public schools do expand that eligibility threshold.

And the Second Amendment, it's a little more nuanced, but in simplest terms it addresses the concerns of the 21 out of 26 public charter schools that already provide free meals to all students through CEP program.

A lot of those CEP enrolled schools are currently forced to cover the gap between the federal reimbursement and and the actual meal costs out of their own budget. So this amendment would ensure that they have the costs needed so they don't have to pass those costs on to families. Thank you so much. Thank you for being here.

Thank you for your testimony. Next we have Hawaii Hunger Action Network and support in person. Thank you so much for Being here. Next we have Hawaii Food Industry association offering testimony and support via Zoom. They are here. Not present. Not present. Next we have Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks offering testimony and support.

Aloha Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee. Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks supports this Bill. Thank you for passing SB 1300 last year which is providing reduced price eligible kids in our regular DOE public schools to free meals this year and next year it will be expanded to 300% of the poverty level. Is about the Alice threshold.

So we definitely support bringing charter schools into this as well since we know that many of their children are low income and also they have a lot of Native Hawaiian students. So it makes sense to make sure that access to free meals is equitable across our state. Thank you. Please pass this Bill.

Thank you so much. Next we have Hawaiian Food Plus Policy offering testimony and support. With the testimony. We have Green Party of Hawaii offering testimony and support. We have Early Childhood Action Strategies offering testimony and support. We have Hawaii Alliance, Hawaii alliance for Progressive Action offering testimony and support.

And we have 37 testifiers individuals all offering testimony support. Anyone else? HB 1561 seeing none Members, are there any questions? Question?

Question for Appleseed, please. Thank you. I know you shared testimony, but we just want to note that we did receive it late for the hearing. But if you can clarify some of the amendments and if you are able to work or meet with the public charter school commission on some of the amendments.

Because we were looking at their testimony and they didn't seem to raise any concerns on how the Bill is currently drafted.

I have not touched base yet, but I would love to at some point. Not since these amendments were suggested. We did talk with a couple of public charter school administrators who expressed these concerns to us.

Can you share with the Committee what those concerns were?

Yeah. So 21 out of 26 public charter schools are already enrolled in the community eligibility provision, which requires that they offer free meals to all of their students already. So this Bill, as currently written, would only apply and benefit the five non CEP charter schools.

Our concern is that a lot of those charter schools aren't meeting the threshold that would help them actually achieve the full 100% reimbursement. And so they're picking up that gap cost out of other funding.

If this Bill were to pass, we're concerned that it could potentially disincentivize schools from participating in CEP and getting that federal reimbursement if most of their students are already in the 300% threshold.

Do you know if this is an issue that was raised or is currently occurring with the DOE CEP schools with the free school meals Bill that we passed last year.

It's not to my knowledge, because the DOE are all under a single school food authority and they have a sort of requirement or mandate that no school can participate in CEP unless they meet 62.5%, which with the multiplier would get them to that 100% reimbursement. So schools under that 62.5% are already not participating in CEP.

Okay, thank you for the clarification. I think. I think that's helpful. But I do feel that the Bill, as currently the Bill as written, is not intending to exclude participation from any public charter schools. In fact, we want as much inclusionary, you know, to include as much as. So we can.

And there's also a blank noting that there's a blank appropriation in the Bill to also kind of have those discussions, but that's it.

Jenny, thank you. I have a couple of questions. Thank you again for being here. So we just get this last minute and I didn't have time to digest it.

You're saying on your page to your testimony that you want, per your first action action item, that it shall align with 302A 404 that school meals within the DOE statute. You're saying that you want it also to apply to 302D or do you stay there?

So the meaning.

Sorry, that wasn't very clear. Meaning that you want me to re articulate the 302A 404 language in 302B. Is that what you're saying?

Yes. So that whatever the requirements are for the public schools and the ability for the DOE traditional public schools to provide free school meals up to a certain threshold will also apply to charter schools going forward.

So that means that you want me to overlay the language in through O2D. Yeah, I'm asking. Not meant to be a leading question.

Right. I don't. I'm. There's suggested amendments. I would also love for somebody that actually drafts HRS language to look it over and make sure that it's appropriate and legal.

Okay, thank you. And then regarding your recommendation. For. There to be added language regarding the CEP below 65 point, 62.5% of the identified student percentage. How does that comport to Federal poverty level? 300% or does it at all?

The 62.5% is the number of students that are directly certified using means testing. So they have either they're enrolled in SNAP or They're in foster care, unstably housed. So there's several different criteria by which they're directly certified. And the multiplier, so it's multiplied by 1.6% is intended to capture the students that are not directly certified.

So the 62.5% if multiplied by 1.6 will get you to 100%.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Remark. Any other questions? Okay, seeing that we're going to move on. Next bill. Next we have HB 1779. This is with regards to student meals and expanding the coverage. First up, we have Department of Education offering comments in person.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the comments Committee, Sean Tajima Assistant Superintendent testify on behalf of the Department of Education. The Department stands on his written testimony that provides comments on this measure. The Department supports the intent of this bill but cannot support this bill in its current format given the fiscal constraints facing the state today. We look forward to working with the Legislature to find a way forward and standby for questions.

Thank you for being here. Next we have the Department of Health offering comments in person. Thank you. Next we have HSTA offering offering testimony support in person.

Hello, Vice Chair. We'll stand on our testimony.

Thank you. Catholic Charities Hawaii offering testimony and support in person. We have Hawaii Public Health Institute in support in person.

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Good to be back here. Thanks for hearing this bill. As you've heard me say many times in this Committee, free school meals is absolutely important. We should not make students go hungry at the school day. They cannot learn.

I think this is something that you folks have supported in the past. And so I don't need to continue to harp on it, but I want to make sure it's clear that we've been cutting taxes for the high income earners to the exclusion of this bill. We have to make this a priority and we can.

We cannot allow the money to be the difference between our students learning and eating at school.

Thank you for your testimony. Next we have the American Heart association providing testimony and support in person. Thank you for your testimony. Next, we have Democratic Party of Hawaii head caucus and support in person.

Hello, Tom Yamachika speaking.

Thank you. Not yet, Tom. Next we have Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks in support via Zoom.

Aloha. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I also stand in support of this bill. Preschool meals are great for kids. There's plenty of evidence for that. And I think last year we talked a little bit about how there are administrative savings by schools no longer having to collect the mail payments.

I put that into the footnote of my testimony. There is a well designed study showing administrative Savings Administration of 67.3 cents per lunch and 58.5 cents per breakfast served so it makes meals more efficient.

Currently 111 DOE schools are already providing universal free meals so it makes sense to expand that and let all of our children and our students have the food that they need to study and learn and thrive.

Thank you thank you for your testimony as we have Hawaii Food Industry association offering testimonial support via Zoom. Not here. Next we have Hawaii Honda Action Network offering testimony support in person. Thank you for being here. Next we have Hawaii Appleseed support in person. Thank you for being here.

We have parents and children together offering testimony supporting testimony. We have Hawaiian Youth Services Network offering testimony support.

We have Hawaiian Food Plus Policy and support, Early Childhood Action Strategies and support Edmark Castillo Photography in Support we have 50501, Home Hawaii and Journal Strike Hawaii and support we have Lambda Law Student association and support White alliance for Progressive Action and support and we have individuals all providing testimony support about 18 anyone else wishing to provide testimony on HB 1779 seeing that Members are there any questions?

Any questions? We're going to go on to the next bill. Quick recession.

Okay, going on to the next Bill, we have HB2296. This is with regards to student meals, minimum revenue requirement and education. First we have Office of the Governor providing testimony support. Next we have superintendent here in person and vice chair Department stands written this morning. So Supervener Superintendent. Next we have White Food Industry association offering testimony support.

Can you guys hear me? That's okay. Next we Public Health Institute and support.

Stand in support, thank you.

Thank you. We have Hawaii Apple Seed offering testimony and support. Thank you for being here. Next we have Hawaiian Children's Action Network Speaks in support via Zoom.

Aloha. Nicole again from Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks. This Bill removes a requirement that our state charge, our DOE charge at least half the cost of producing a school meal for the children who don't qualify for free or reduced price meals.

Our current prices for a family with two students eating breakfast and lunch at school, if they pay the full price, it's about $1,300 a year for those parents. So it's already a significant cost in a state where families are struggling to make ends meet.

There's no federal mandate about how much schools must charge for the full price of school meals. So this is literally the state sort of tying one of their hands behind their back.

So we definitely support reducing this ratio or just eliminating it altogether because the Federal Government does not require this for us to continue to participate in the school program. Thank you.

Thank you so much for your testimony. Next we have the Democratic Party of Hawaii Education Caucus offering testimony and support. Next we have Hawaii Students policy.

Thank you.

Next we have white food plus policy and support. And we have two individuals both in support. Anyone else? HB 2296. Seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Okay, seeing none. We're gonna go back to the beginning of the agenda. HB 2374.

This regarding the Department of Education and establishing a tree planting program within the DOE on DOE campuses. First we have each perch we have testimony from the superintendent offering testimony and support.

Vice Chair, we stand on our testimony.

Thank you.

Thank you for being here. Next we have DLNR offering testimony to support. Chair person in support, we'll have.

Heather McMillan from DLNR. We stand on our written testimony. Please support. Happy to answer any questions. And I did. I'll just add briefly that I did see the testimony.

Oh, if you're going to talk, you have to come up.

Heather McMillan from DLNR. I'm our state urban and Community forester and I did see the testimony from DOE and just wanted to give some perspective on the Points raised which I agree with. The first was that participation in the program should be voluntary. I think that's easy. I agree.

Second, there was a point about the need the increased burden on custodial staff with the maintenance that trees require. And that's also something that I think is important to address. However, it's not only custodians that take care of trees on campus.

There are also some teachers and students that support in that work as well as contracted professional tree care services that are contracted either by DAD or DOE. So it doesn't all fall to the custodians. It depends on the height of the tree.

And then the other point about the food safety for any food produced on the trees, I don't really have a comment on. But yeah, happy to answer any questions.

Thank you for being here. Next we have testimony from the Hawaii Food plus policy offering testimony supply four. That's all I have my on my list. Is there anyone else HB2374 seeing none Members, are there any questions?

Thank you. So in your testimony you mentioned you provided comments on the program mandating school participation, that it should be voluntary and then about fruit being served. But can you point me to where in the Bill language that states that because I didn't see says voluntary.

And then the third point you said, well, fruit brain trees offer educational opportunities, good agriculture practices, certification and approval from the school. Like where does that point to in the Bill? Because I don't see that.

Thank you for the opportunity to test the fire. Vice Chair Jesse Suki, Superintendent Deputy Superintendent of Operations these are just comments that we provided of some of the concerns and things that we thought the Legislature might want to think about as it moves this Bill forward if it does.

And so the concept of, you know, who can eat the fruit because we'll, we'll have the fruit would depend on the certification that we have here to that particular point.

So just to reiterate, Section 2 of the Bill says that the DOE may and then the three parts consist really on the propagation and planting of the trees as well as in the final point which is encouraging inclusion of students in the participation and care of the native trees.

So just to clarify that, I don't think that that's what's currently written in the Bill or if that's what the author has intended and based on your testimony.

Thank you. Thank you Members. Any other questions? Okay, so you know we're going to go on to the next Bill which is HB 1925. This is regarding certificate program. First up we have DOE offering comments.

Good afternoon. The Department stands on its written testimony offering comments. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Next we have Hawaii State Youth Commission offering testimony and support, actually via Zoom. There you.

Go.

Yes. Aloha. Chair Woodson, Vice Chair Lachica. Members of the House Committee on Education. My name is Lehua Norris. I'm the chair of the Environmental Committee of the Hawaii State Youth Commission and I'm speaking today on behalf of the commission to voice strong support of HB 1925.

As mentioned in our testimony, a climate literacy certificate would incentivize schools to offer climate related courses and in doing so create a clear pathway for students interested in sust sustainability and resilience work. Ensuring that students graduate prepared to take on green jobs and requiring both classroom and experiential learning.

HB 1925 brings much needed climate education and real world problem solving in our communities. The Commission views this program as an investment in the next generation of leaders who will be integral to meeting the state's goals of 100% renewable electricity by 2045 and at least 50% below 2005 greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 windows.

When students learn climate literacy through both classes and projects, it prepares them for informed decision making and community resilience efforts across Hawaii. Therefore, the Hawaii State Youth Commission strongly urges the Committee to pass HB 1925. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you for your testimony. Next we have Climate Climate Future Forum offering testimony support. Thank you for being here.

Hi, my name is Janaya, I live in Waipahu and this is Daydream 2 and we're on behalf of the Climate Future Forum speaking strongly of HB19. Climate change isn't just something far away or abstract. It's already shaping our communities, our health and our future.

Yet students are supposed to accept this fate without being fully educated on the topic. When we continue to hit surface level on these topics, we are creating climate anxiety rather than empowerment and innovation. I am fortunate enough to attend a school that has courses and opportunities that dive into sustainability and real world solutions.

I've learned how students can help build systems that are resilient and responsible. But my friends testifying with me today wish they could be able to have the same opportunities too. But they are blocked by funding and resources. Climate literacy is an investment in informed citizens, future leaders and resilient communities.

Passing this Bill is a message to us students that you believe in our ability to change the world. I urge you to pass this Bill not just for us students today, but for the future. We all Share.

Thank you. Aloha My name is Jayden Koskayan. I'm a student attending Waipalo High School. Speaking in strong support of House Bill 1925 as a Member of the Sustainability Fellowship at Bruno School, a 15 month program dedicated to educating students about what it means to live sustainably within the context of violent life.

It's extremely important that we open up. The opportunity for students to gain more knowledge in climate literacy and to be acknowledged for their hard work. With this certificate in school, I noticed that our student body has little knowledge on the topic of climate change.

Having this climate literacy certification would motivate students to learn more about this topic and how to mitigate the effects of climate change on our home. I hope to see this House Bill pass as it is a big leap forward forward into a more sustainable future for Hawaii.

Doing so would also allow us as a state to be role models role models for other states of the country. To thank you for that.

Thank you so much. Okay, next we have testimony from our Children's Trust offering testimony support via Zoom.

Okay, next we have testimony done a different kind of credit Hawaii at office and support. We'll stand on our test. Thank you. Next we have 350 Hawaii offering testimony and support. And we have individual test testimony from 12 other people all in support. Anyone else? HB 1925 please come up and state your name.

Not here.

Hello Chair Wson hello Vice Chair. My name is. My name is Inez Caborno and I'm from Waipagua High School. I'm a current junior here and I stand in strong support of HB1925 on behalf of the Climate Future Forum.

I have been lucky enough to receive sustainability in climate education through programs such as Future Farmers of America or through the Sustainability Program at Punahou and I strongly believe that it helped me share shape my goals and visions for the future.

However, I understand that a lot of my peers from my home school have not been able to receive these same opportunities and hearing their visions and goals for the future. I wholeheartedly believe that they'll have a stronger backing by receiving appropriate and strong sustainable education.

Thank you Aloha Chair and Vice Chair. My name is Jason Garcia and I'm a student from Waipahu High School, also a junior, and I'm speaking in strong support of House Bill 1925.

As a Member of FFA organization focused on agriculture and sustainability, I believe it's important that students like me are recognized for knowledge and work in climate University. In school, environmental issues are often overlooked because people only see them on social media or. Or when problems arise.

These certifications could inspire more students to learn about climate change and how to reduce its impacts. Passing this Bill is an important step towards a more sustainable future. To support the generations to come, Please support House Bill 1925.

Thank you for your testimony.

Thank you so much. Anyone else? HB 1925 Members? Are there any questions?

Thank you.

Can I testify?

Sure. Please go ahead.

Speak your name. Thanks. I'm Chapin Fish. I'm testifying as an individual.

Thank you.

Thanks. Well, thank you very much for the opportunity to testify before I start off. So I'm Chapin, as I mentioned, and I'm testifying in favor of this Bill to stand in solidarity with the Hawaiian youth, many of whom we just heard today. I'm myself, I'm actually from Portland, Oregon, but I'm from being from the Pacific Northwest.

I'm from a region that suffers similar harms to Hawaii, like wildfires, coastal flooding, sea level rise. In fact, in 2020, you know, my hometown experienced 15 days of hazardous air quality because of wildfires. And since then, I've really tried to make an impact about the climate, and that's why I'm here today.

I think education is key in any major change. It doesn't happen overnight. It starts with the youth. And the green economy is no different. And I think this climate literacy program that HB 1925 establishes would be a great way for Hawaii to kind of make good on their promise to protect the youth and their futures.

This Bill is amazing. I really. I think it's so good, and I hope other states, like my own, will follow your lead. So thank you very much for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you for your testimony. Anyone else wishing to testify? Seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Questions for the kids? Oh, please, go ahead. For the students.

I actually have a question for the Department. How would you fit in and support some of the work you folks are already doing around cte?

It seems to me like this would be a really seamless way to support some of the asks that the kids have, along with the future of climate change and sustainability and what kind of local practices we have that can be implemented. There's a lot of seamlessness that I feel like can occur from this.

How is the Department feeling about that integration with this certification?

And we do have CTE pathways that absolutely do support the concepts in this Bill, especially our natural resources pathway and our energy pathway that has alternative fuels technology and a sustainable energies technology, both which directly address climate change. Not all schools. I Think that's what the students were saying. Offer these exact pathways, but they are available.

What is going on Common throughout all of our schools is our national Our Next generation science Standards. And I'll give you three examples. These are science standards embedded in every school and are in the elementary standards. They do cover weather patterns, climate, natural, natural resources and human impacts on Earth's systems.

Then moving to middle school, this is standards introduce evidence of climate change, interactions among systems and the causes of modern climate change. And then in high school, the standards require students to analyze climate systems, use models to forecast future change, and evaluate the impact of human activity.

So the Department will continue supporting educators in implementing the next generation science Standards and providing climate literacy opportunities for students across the state. So that would be the uniform practice.

And how quickly can you get. If enacted, how quickly can you get some of the requests for coursework that are here and like that hands on learning. Right. Because there's standards and then there's hands on learning and opportunity for kids. And I think that's what they're requesting. How quickly can you folks get.

I agree. And that, that, that is and should be embedded in our standards. And we're committed to continually doing training on those standards and how to implement put those standards into practice so that the students do have that hands on meaningful learning and can actually experience what they're. What they're doing. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much. Members, any other questions? A couple questions for the students that are currently enrolled in a type of coursework. Any students want to come up? Okay. While you're coming up, just so you can think about it.

Just curious to know, like, what type of topics are you learning in these classes, classes that you're participating in, and why do you think it's important for other students to participate past what some of you have already said?

Okay. I think we're all part of the sustainability program at Punahou, and a lot of the sustainability that we learn about and how it's different from our classroom learning is it's about the sustainable problems that are localized in Hawaii and how they're affecting, like, our economy and our society, specifically in Hawaii.

And I feel like that was an important difference between, like, classroom learning and the things that we were learning in the program because we had, like, a more connected feeling to them. And.

Yes, thank you. That's very insightful. This guy. This guy right here. No, you don't have to. Maybe have to.

Like, oppositely I go to private school, but I used to go to Waipahu too. I have a class exactly like our fellowship and it's like, called Global Sustainability by Design. And we basically do exactly what we're doing in the fellowship right now, but in a classroom setting.

So it's like we're actually doing like an action project as our last semester thing where you go into our community and try to fix something. And that, like, really stood out to me because, yeah, it's like forcing kids to take action, but it's also like bringing us to the spot.

Like, oh, how can we make change as students?

What was your project? What was your community project?

We're like, coming up with it right now. It's like, this semester.

Okay, nice. Anyone else?

I kind of did something similar. I'm also part of the SFP or the Sustained Entrepreneurship Program, but also I'm part of FFA as I mentioned. And we do these things called agroscience projects. And one of the projects I did was testing plants with salinity levels and testing with salt on it. Because we live around an island.

And I feel like solving these problems based on our island just bring this together. Thank you.

If I may, the both of them. I also think that these projects are very different from projects that we would find in, like, in our schools because they're looking at novel ways to tackle climate problems and like, experiment and, and find these new ways to help progress our world sustainability wise.

And I don't think that we get that in a regular science classroom. So. Thank you.

Great. Thank you so much. Thank you, students. Appreciate it.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you.

Thank you for that. Seeing no other questions. Apologies. We're gonna jump around a little bit. We're going to go to HB 2300 and that is with regards to the DOE of procurement. First up, we have Department of Education offering testimony and support. Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, we stand on our testimony support. Thank you.

Thank you for being here. Next we have SPO offering comments. Thank you for being here. Next we have local food coalition offering testimony in support. Okay. Next we have Hawaii Farm Bureau offering testimony support. That's all we have. Anyone else? HB2300 seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Okay. Seeing none.

We're going to go on to the next Bill. It is HB 2147. This is a proposal to help Fund education. First up, we have Department of Education offering comments.

Good afternoon. Chair Brian Hallett, Superintendent for DOE Department stands on the written testimony and support. Or. Or with comments rather. But I just wanted to clarify why comments. Because funding for is Really a statewide matter. Statewide concern. Our concerns are really around adequacy and predictability of funds.

And as mentioned in our testimony, we've had some challenges over the years with predictable funding. Our funding is very fluctuated with economic conditions and that just presents challenge. And this type of funding mechanism tied to property could help stabilize that. So we still support that intent, but defer to the Legislature on how to Fund education.

Can you show that graph again?

Can the audience see this graph? Can I see upper right?

Thank you. What it shows is that our percent of our budget is going down. Of the total state budget, it's been as high as 27% in recent years and as low as 19%. Currently stands around 22%. So we do have challenges in particular around predictability. And so that is why we had testimony with just comments.

We support intent.

Thank you, sir, from CFO Hallett. All right, next we have State Public Charter School Commission offering testimony and support in person. Share. The commission stands on its submitted testimony in support of 21. Thank you so much for being here. Next we have Hawaii Teacher Standards for offering testimony and support in person. Thank you so much.

We have HSTA offering testimony of support in person.

We stand in strong support.

Thank you. Thank you so much. We have Hawaii Realtors association offering testimony and opposition. We also have Democratic Party Hawaii Education Caucus offering testimony and support.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair and Members. My name is Cameron Hurt. I enjoy coming to this Committee a lot. One of the things that it allows me to do is to be able to speak as a constituent and not as a professional representing an organization.

I get to talk about my real lived experience and what I've had to do to get to where I am. And education is something profound to me. One, as a former teacher, two, as a single father, it was the thing that made life manageable for me as a single father having that strong education system.

And I think, and I look at where we're at now and I think, and I look about at cost of living, how things are going up. I just look at how bus fare is going up.

And I remember being very nervous about my son testing out of special education because we were going to lose the discount on bus fare. That's a really sad thing and guilty thing to feel at times, but it is what a lot of parents are doing dealing with.

And what we're asking you is to give it to the people. Is it a fair question to say that if you own multiple homes and nobody's living in it and that home is valued over $3 million. Is it fair to say that you will give a portion of tax money to the Keiki, to the community?

I would hope that we would all have the heart to say if we were blessed enough to be able to afford multiple homes at multiple millions, that we would want to give that to our students and to our community. We're asking you to simply give that question to the public. Let's see. Thank you, Pastor. Thank you.

Next we have Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks offering testimony support via Zoom.

Hello again, Nicole Wu from Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks. We support this Bill because when you look at the amount of funding that goes to the public school compared to our budget, Hawaii public schools are underfunded, cited in my testimony.

And also we have some of the lowest property rates in the nation and we have some very expensive residential investment properties as Cameron just mentioned. So we think that these really fortunate people who can invest in our beautiful places and mansions can help pay for the public schools for our children. So thank you for hearing this Bill.

Thank you for your testimony. Next we have Tax foundation of Hawaii offering comments via Zoom.

Thank you, Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax foundation of Hawaii. We have several concerns so about this, this Bill. We have stated them in a written testimony.

We also wanted to point out that in 2018 when a similar measure was proposed and invalidated at the at the ballot box, the Supreme Court of Hawaii issued an opinion in City and County of Honolulu versus State 2018 case. We don't think that the concerns expressed in the Supreme Court's opinion have been addressed in this Bill.

So we would urge that attention be paid to this important issue. Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for being here. Next we have the Grassroots Institute for South Hawaii offering testimony in opposition, individual testimony from Mr. Fitzpatrick from Molly via Zoom and support. And we have actually testimony from Early Childhood Action Network Strategies offering testimony support, written testimony. We have Aloha Project operating testimony support.

We have testimony from several individuals, about 12 all in support with one individual offering testimony in opposition. Anyone else? HB2147. Okay. Seeing none Members. Are there any questions?

Is Realtors Association here?

Thank you. Next we're going to go on to the next Bill then HB 2391. This is with regards to a get tax holiday for school supplies. First up we have on our testifiers list is. Department of Education in person and support.

Hi, Elizabeth Higashi from the Department of Education. We provide Just saying that we are grateful any support our families are given and we defer to other agencies that would be impacted with implementation.

Thank you so much. All my mistake.

It.

Next we have Department of Taxation providing comments in person.

Good afternoon, Department of Taxation. Clinton Piper. Comments.

Thank you so much. Next we have the Tax foundation employee offering comments via Zoom.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika for Tax Foundation. We will stand on a written testimony bands and be able to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you so much. That's all I have on my list. Is there anyone else? HB2391 seeing none Members, are there any questions?

Thank you, Chair. I have a question for Tax foundation. Actually. Yeah, no, actually, I'm sorry. DOE Tax. Sorry about that. So how do you see implementation of this taking shape? I mean, it seems a little bit hard to enforce compliance. How exactly would the Department be able to ensure that retailers are following through and that it's accurate?

You know, how do we do the actual mechanics of this measure?

Well, with the way. Sorry. CLINTON piper, Department of Taxation the way it's currently phrased, we would be relying in large part on voluntary complian compliance by the taxpayer. Currently, we don't have a. We don't have any similar procedure, so we might have to promulgate administrative rules regarding it.

It's a little too early to say exactly how that would shake out. More likely than not, there would need to be changes to the annual, sorry, the semiannual get as well as the annual get. But how they'd be able to advertise how we the word out to the taxpayers. Those are all up in the air right now.

Could it also potentially be like in the instance of a car seat purchase you show you submit your receipt when you file your tax return? Could this be something that parents, when they're filling out their. What is it, the N3 the individual tax return? I don't know. It's been so long since they've had to file.

But when they file their individual tax form, they submit the receipt to verify that parents actually spent spent this money on school supplies on such and such a date, and then they received the credit back that way. Is that a possibility?

The GET is imposed not on the individual taxpayer, but on the business itself. So to accomplish what you're proposing would have to be a markedly different Bill which would transfer instead of a GET exemption, we'd have to transfer and create instead a essentially an income tax credit or maybe a rebate program.

But that would not be the vehicle that we have in this Bill. But yeah, that is another way that it could be addressed. But that's not what's in this Bill.

So on the back of a GET filing sheet, you write down all of your exemptions. Is that where the company or business would say, well, we're exempted from paying get on this amount.

We don't have a procedure for it yet. So that is one possible way that we could amend the GET forms we have. Of course, until we actually have to try to implement it, we don't know exactly how that would shake out. It could be that we would have.

Normally speaking, if someone is having gross income, they will have to declare any exemptions. Exactly how they would declare this particular exemption hasn't been decided yet. If past is prologue, they would have to report report that they got income and they're claiming the exemption using a particular code. But that hasn't been sorted out yet.

Okay, thank you so much. Thank you. Chair.

Thank you.

Any questions? Any other questions? Members. Seeing that we're going to go to the next Bill, which is HB 1672. This is with regards to the Department of Education underutilized buildings and potential housing projects on DOE campuses. First, we have DOE operating comments in person. Good afternoon.

Rise in stand on our testimony with comments. Thank you.

Thank you for being here. That's all I have on my list. Anyone else? HB 1672 seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Please go ahead.

Department, please. Thank you for being here. Where are we on the consolidation plan and school consolidation and is housing being factored in as one of the frameworks or I guess one of the things that the Department is considering when it comes to school consolidation?

Thank you. I was going to turn back and look for her and she knows. Yes, Hi.

So we just updated the board and one of the things that we are looking for school consolidation is to potentially identify clusters of schools in the spring of 2027 is the timeline that we publicized in regards to the factoring of development we are looking at.

I think one, I just want to be honest, tracking of development is highly challenging with how rapidly a lot of development is moving. What's important to us as a Department is how we look at absorption schedules.

I think what's really important is not knowing just when a development is going to happen, but when it's going to be built and it's going to be happening.

So we are looking at development being factored in the study component because we think it's important that when we identify schools to be studied, it has to be factored in looking at development.

But at this time we don't have it factored in identification being a cluster of schools that may be Identified to be studied for consolidation could be identified. And we would not at that time be factoring those developmental components, if that makes sense.

Kinda. But I think we all understand the purpose of the Bill, which is really to because of the extreme shortage of where we can develop housing as well as ways that we can protect potentially attract more educators into the field.

I think the Bill is intended to look at potentially another best use for underutilized facilities in the same way that we were looking at state facilities and state classrooms for pre K expansion. So I mean very different types of development.

But of course like where does the Department kind of stand when it should comes to factoring in how we prioritize housing and whether is housing a component as one of the housing one of the components of figuring out best use for these facilities.

So from that perspective looking at facilities and lands.

We have our comment on the Bill, you know, was not in opposition because we recognize the need, but just that the Legislature or the Committee considers not making it a required priority because we have a mission to try and use our lands for the mission, which is teaching and education.

So the way that the Bill was drafted, it looked like it kind of made housing as a priority that we had to prioritize above other things. So that was our concern. But to what as Higashi just mentioned, you know, it's part of a larger process where we look at different uses and priorities for those labs.

And sorry to clarify further.

I think what's really important that comes through the study component when you do a consolidation is when you have especially the community feedback and you're working with the communities in that process at that time is when you're exploring all the different options for if a score to be consolidated, what happens to the utilization of space afterwards?

I think those are things that are done through that process. But not to say other. I think what's important is consolidation doesn't always lead to a closure. It could also lead to exploration of other ways to utilize space that maybe that might come out as a recommendation that the board may take action on.

Final question check. And so in the community process. Thanks for sharing that. What if housing does come up as one of the identified priorities for that particular community as something that should be considered. Does the Department have a plan then to kind of figure out next steps for that particular parcel?

I think that would be something that would have to be part of our plan because in the process, not only do you plan for a transition and consolidation, we would be responsible for exactly to depending on what like if it's housing or other things within our purvey of responsibilities, we would have a responsibility to develop that plan.

I would just add from a facilities perspective, when you put a portion of a school property into housing use, for example, it's a commitment for at least 40 to 65 years.

So part of the considerations and criteria I think the process would be looking at is, you know, if there is land available and we're not going to use it for school and the community wants it and it's something that could happen, you know, then it's something to look at.

If it's going to coexist with a school because the school's not necessarily moving, then that's a different conversation about how is that going to work. And then there's also looking ahead and not wanting to tie up land when we may need the property because, you know, things grow not consistently in different regions.

You know, you may have growth in one area slows down in another area, then that area grows because there's proposed housing in the future. So we have to remain flexible.

Thank you, chair.

Thank you. Mr. Any other questions? Seeing them, we're going to go to the next Bill, which is HB2301. This is with regards to licensure, Department of Education and the University of Hawaii. First up, we have DOE offering testimony support in person. Oh, DOE stands on testimony and so forth. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Next we have University of Hawaii writing comments in person.

University of Hawaii stands on its own. Comp on its written testimony offering comments. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Next we have AG's offering comments via Zoom or in person.

Good afternoon. The Department of the Attorney General just wants to request that the statewide concern language be inserted into the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you so much. That's all I have on my list. Anyone else wishing to testify on HB 2301? Seeing none. Members any questions? Okay, seeing none, we're going to go on to the next Bill, which is HB 1997. This is with regards to IEPs and receipt, vaccination, evacuation plans, mobilization.

First up, we have the DOE offering comments in person.

Hi, good afternoon. The Department stands on its written testimony. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Next we have the State Council on Developmental Disabilities. Thank you so much. Next we have Hawaii Disabilities Rights center offering testimony support. We have Bayada and support. Anyone else wish to provide testimony, please go ahead.

My name is Peter Fritz. I did submit testimony. I'm an attorney. I'm an individual with a disability.

My sister attended school before the IDEA program and I'm behind this Bill, I read an article entitled I Could be Left behind to Die, which described a number of incidences where a student in Maryland was left in a stairway during a fire.

There was a shooting at a school, and a student with a cane had trouble evacuating and two people were killed. The officers approached the student with their guns drawn. Hopefully they didn't. And they didn't mistake or cane for a gun.

Fortunately, there are situations where a wheelchair couldn't fit into the area for shelter, for shooting because a wheelchair couldn't fit through the door. There are a number of incidences for that.

And after reading this article, I researched the Virginia law that the article referenced, and I used that and submitted it to the deafblind Task Force to be drafted into a Bill. This is an issue that needs to be taken seriously. Students need safety.

All students and sometimes individuals with disabilities present specific challenges or concerns that really need to be addressed. And that was the purpose of this Bill. Taking my white hat off and being neutral.

I will say that when the first version of the Virginia Bill was passed, it was revised because they expressed some concern that the language could cause some liability issues for the state school board or the state institutions. The version I submitted actually was the final version which had that language removed.

But I might suggest that the consideration be given to asking the AG to opine upon whether or not this Bill would create certain liabilities for the state and look at the language from that particular perspective. I thank you for the opportunity to testify.

If you would like a copy of that particular article, please send an email to me. My email is at the top of my testimony, and I'd be happy to send it to you along with a copy of the Virginia law. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. And if you have any questions, I'll stay around.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Fritz, if you can just go ahead and send that article to my office in case Members want to take. A look at it.

Thank you. I'd be happy to do so. Thank you, sir.

Thank you, Members. Any questions? Okay. Seeing that we're going to go on to the next Bill, which is HB2293, harm to student Registry. First up on our list, we have DOD offering testimony and support. DOE stands out as testimony and support. Thanks. Thank you so much for being here.

Next, we have BO Association of Different Schools, offering testimony and support in person.

Hello. Thank you for having us here today. I am Deanna Olier. The Executive Director of the Hawaii Association of Independent Schools. Representing about 100 schools here in Hawaii. We stand in support of the Bill as written. Thank you so much.

Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for being here. That's all I have. Anyone else? HB2293 Seeing none. Members, are there any questions? We're going to go on to the next Bill which is HB 1801 or excuse me, 1803. This is with regards to heat exposure and students.

First up on our list we have State Board of Education offering comments.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members, cops, employee, Executive Director, have for or stands on its written comments.

Thank you so much for being here in your comments. Next we have DOE Superintendent offering comments.

Good afternoon. The Department stands on its written comments. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Next we have Charter school commission offering support in person.

Good afternoon, Chair.

And the commission stands on its submitted testimony support. Thank you for being here. Next we have Hawaii Climate Change Health Working Group says also here Jobsman in support in person.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. I'm Elizabeth Keefer. I'm a physician on faculty at Jabsom testifying as an individual, but I'm a Member of the Climate Change and Policy Working Group.

I stand on my written chest of but just wanted to highlight to you today that we are actually already seeing some of the health effects.

And at a recent statewide PE conference this summer where we presented on heat illness, we had teachers come up to us already and tell us that they're already experiencing some heat illness in their students, including one incident that needed evaluation in the emergency room.

So this prompted us to start a pilot program in a West Oahu school to deal with some of these heat. Issues, especially as we heard that the. Teacher went out and bought her own device, underscoring the need for this Bill. But a pilot in one school is not enough.

And this Bill would place these devices in DOE and charter schools and pair them with Hawaii's existing Athletic Trainer association heat policy. So together they provide clear guidelines that protect students but also coaches and teachers by removing the guesswork from safety decisions. Thank you.

Thank you, Dr. Kiefer. Thank you for that clarification. Thank you for your testimony. Next we have Boy Public Health Institute offering testimony support in person.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, James McCallan. On behalf of Hawaii Public Health Institute, we stand on our written comments but offer a brief amendment. We appreciate the opportunity to opportunity to clarify which activities are covered under this Bill.

We would support an amendment that clearly identifies physical education, recess and athletics as activities requiring heat based modifications.

For activities that vary more in structure, such as band, ROTC and field trips, we recommend that webhole low temperature readings be available to inform decision making with those modifications left to the staff discretion, which is an improvement to the current practices where those activities do not have access to low temperature readings.

The Corey Stringer Institute, the leading national research institute on heat illness prevention, has advised caution for those activities due to heatrisk, though those specific modification guidance are still emerging. Happy to answer any questions about policy.

Thank you. And James, just to note that the testimony that you submitted is separate from what you're sharing with the Committee right now.

Yeah. Your office reached out and we followed up with additional testimony.

Just noting that we received it in the.

Oh, thank you.

Yes, thank you. Next up we have Children's Action Network Speaks in support.

Aloha. I'm standing on our written testimony in support of this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. We also have Hawaii Public Health association offering testimony and support, Life of the Land in support. Edmer Castillo Photography in support. Association of Native Hawaiian Physicians in support. We also have Sierra Club of Hawaii in support and 21 individuals offering testimony in support. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 1803? Seeing none.

Members, any questions? House Bill 1803 seeing none. We are going to move to the next Bill, House Bill 1840. This is the alternative pathway for J1 visa teachers. First up, we have Department of Education in support.

The Department stands up its testimony.

Thank you so much. We have Hawaii Teacher Standards Board in opposition.

Thank you. Chair and Vice Chair Mitzi Higa speaking on behalf of the Hawaii Teacher Standards board. We feel 1840 this Bill is not really necessary. As we know. We don't offer licenses or permits from other places or where somebody's located. It's basically they apply for what they're what is available and what they meet the requirements for.

So although HTSB supports our J1s, we want to make sure that wherever they come from internationally, we don't have enough people to wow. To actually look at their program programs that they have in other countries. So we do have a process that they go through.

But although this Bill is well intentioned, I mean there's a bigger problem and it's in our testimony and it's about what I learned at NCSL a couple of years ago and it's more about how loan sharks are taking advantage of our J1 visa teachers that are coming over here and they're giving them compounded interest, 50% compounded interest on loan for like a relocation, whatever they need.

And we heard during the fire there was a teacher that actually was affected. She had a $3,000 loan, but now take 3,000 and compound it over the time that it's due by a certain time. And they were actually getting to their family that were in the Philippines. This is a bigger concern.

So although we can look at licensure paths and and they can always apply and we have permitted and we have licensed teachers with J1 visas, there's already a path there.

So we're just saying that this is unnecessary and that I don't know what the state can do about it, but the loans that they're getting to come over here, 50% compounded interest is too much, and that's a bigger concern for us. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Next up, we have State Health Planning and Development Agency, SHIFTA in support. We also have the legal clinic in support.

Good afternoon Chair Woodson, Vice Chair La Chica and Members of the Committee. I am Tina Sablan here on behalf of the Legal Clinic and also on behalf of our Board President Amy Ek. TLC is a nonprofit dedicated to immigrant justice through legal services, education and advocacy. We stand in our written testimony in full support of House Bill 1840.

To briefly highlight a few points, the Bill provides a pathway, an alternative pathway for qualified international teachers to contribute fully to our schools and communities during their authorized stay under the J1 visa program.

International teachers serve a vital role in Hawaii's education system, especially in hard to fill positions and in rural and neighbor island schools, in aligning teacher permits with the duration of J1 visas. House Bill 1840 supports workforce stability for schools and fairness for our visiting teachers.

And it ensures that students benefit from the full full term of service that their international teachers are authorized to provide. We respectfully urge the Committee to pass this measure.

Thank you so much. We have Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights and support. We also have Indivisible Hawaii State Network in support, League of Women Voters Hawaii in support. We have Roots for Board in support. And several individuals submitting testimony in support, several of which are also J1 teachers, about 58 supporters and one offering comments.

Is there anyone else here in person. Or online machine to testify on House Bill 1840. Seeing none Members? Questions? I have a question for HTSB.

Thank you for your testimony. Can you walk me through the process that a J1 teacher would have to take to get their visa to come here and then how they're placed in a school?

What we don't know because we're not the employer is that process. That would be the employer that goes through that process. We only know about the licensing portion. Do you want me to walk through.

Can you walk me through the licensing portion then?

Okay, so if someone, let's say they email us and they say that they have their license in another country, then we ask them to submit their, let's say id, the Social Security. They get a work visa and then they get a work Social Security number that we put in the system.

And then they have to put their transcript, it's through like Spantran or it's basically Mises eval of their transcripts. So we know like their secondary education for whatever math. Okay.

Then we look at it and we say okay, then you just need to take these three praxis to make sure that you're ready to be in front of our kids here in the US. There are, there is a core which is like a high school equivalency of ELA math. And what is it? ELA Math, social studies.

It's a combination kind of thing. And then they have the grade level band like if they're secondary, okay. It's 6:12 and there's a test that they take on that and then there is one on content. So the content kutlessates in mathematics, the one that we once they meet all that criteria, they get their license.

We find that the one they struggle with probably the most is writing and it's in the core and that's concerning to us. So we want to keep this in place because we want to make sure if they're going a lot of them are right now are going into our elementary schools and our special ed lines.

One Special ed law is different internationally so it depends where they come from. We want to make sure they're up on that. And then also teaching reading and writing is as simp in elementary school. So that's the big need area right now. So that's why we want to make sure that we continue the same process.

And there are licensed teachers who have J1. Oh, sorry. Can I just add that DOE has recently offered studies for studies for their praxis which is great because we think what they need is a study session to get them ready for this type of test.

If they are going. You mentioned they have to take all these different practices if they are going to become a special education teacher say at the lower or upper school. Right.

Is there any training aside from I guess the new studies that are being provided by the Department around special education and teaching spend for some of these teachers?

I don't know if they do. I know that when we give a special ed license that they do have to have their degree in special ed. But again, because there's a difference between internationally what is required for special ed law. We need to know US law. So there is the test and that's the criteria.

I don't know what the educated, I mean what the employer. They might also offer other things, but. We don't know for sure.

Quick question for the DOE.

Please go ahead.

I guess filling in the blanks of what HTSB cannot answer. If someone maybe doesn't understand special education law here in our state, are they still is it up to the principal? Because the principal controls the lines. Right. About however they utilize their J1 teachers.

Correct. So the principal is the one that controls the lines of how they're using their J1 teachers. You know, we are going out to the Philippines and other areas to recruit international teachers. There are special education teachers. They have been trained in their own country.

When they do come to us, though, we are working with them to provide practice, support and help. We also are working with them through our Office of Student Support Services to look at what we can do to provide them additional IEP training and those.

And it's really based on an individual basis and where the principal is seeing the need and what we can do to better support those individuals.

So there's really no accountability on the licensure side that lets us know that this individual has to have certification or an understanding of special education law before they are placed in a SPED classroom because the principal might think that that's okay for them to be in that line or she needs someone to cover that line.

Am I correct in my understanding?

So when the principal is posting the line, it's on our NEOAD system. It's posted as a special education position. The individual is able to apply for the position if they meet the requirements.

And then at that point, the principal would do the interview to determine whether or not it looks like it's an appropriate fit or not, and then would offer the position to the individual if they felt it is a good match.

From that point, then the school and the Department would work with the individual to determine what are the best supports and needs so that we can ensure that they're successful and ultimately so our students are successful.

Okay. I have some concerns around this measure mainly because I'm getting complaints about a J1 teacher on a campus that has issues already around whether or not that person is qualified to be teaching special education and understanding an IEP for individual students with heavy disabilities. That's the only reason I'm a little concerned.

Although I will say I am very supportive of our J1 teachers in General. I just want to make sure that if they're going to teach special education students or whatever student that they're teaching, that they are highly qualified for the specifics of what they're doing in that classroom. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you so much for your questions.

Members, other questions.

Vice Chair, go ahead. Okay. Effort. DOE, how do you recruit these J1 teachers? Is this a passive process where they approach you or are you actively in these countries with job posting saying come to Hawaii, etc.

Good question. So we are working with an outside vendor at this point. So the outside vendor is helping us to advertise in some of these countries. From there, they're putting a pool of candidates together.

Some of our recruiters then are then going out to that country to then do a preliminary interview with individuals to help to screen some of the candidates down. So we're slowly starting with a larger pool and then moving it down from there.

What happens is we have them apply to the Department of Education, we go through that process and then they're referred out to the schools at that point. So our vendor has a select number of visas that they're offering. So there is a cap that and it varies from year to year.

And what countries are you recruiting from?

So currently right now we have individuals from the Philippines. We also have a few that are coming from Kenya right now.

Generally speaking, how do they rate year to year in terms of their performance?

So currently right now, I think, you know, many of our principals have been asking for us to continue the program. I think overall the success, success of the program has been quite well and well received by our principals and by our communities at this point.

Yeah, overall I think it's been a positive program to really help with this cultural exchange. And we just want to ensure that we have consistency in the classrooms as we move forward. We're also wanting quality, you know, but also consistency as we move forward here in this process.

Sure. I know we had a discussion on House Bill 1825 the other day. Similar Bill expand from three to five years. So just again my concern is that we're kind of extending a temporary solution. You know, we're not really looking at the supply side.

Again that's out of, not in the DOE's domain but that, you know, we're trying to make the best of a unfortunate situation.

So I understand that the reason for this Bill, but again just concerning that again this is a temporary kind of a band aid and that we're becoming over reliant on it and without coming up with a long term recruitment and retention strategy going forward. Thank you. Thank you. Chair, thank you so much.

Thank you. You mentioned an outside vendor. Do you have the number of what we're paying this contractor?

It's a no cost contract to the Department.

Okay. Is there a cost? No cost is surprising. Can you explain how that works?

So there are fees for the program and the outside vendor does advertise on their website when people are interested from these neighboring countries of applying of what the fee schedule and what the fee structure is for those individuals.

So those individuals pay the fee in order to participate. Okay. And then you mentioned that we every so often the Department will send someone to do the initial interview.

So yes, either once or twice a year we will send a few of our recruiters from the Office of Talent Management over to the Philippines, for example. They'll work with our outside vendor in coordinating an interview schedule. We'll have these individuals come in.

We will do preliminary interviews and make some determinations of which ones we would like to move to the next step and actually invite them to apply for the Department.

How, how much does that cost? Do you have an estimate of how much that the Philippines and Kenya are fairly far away.

I would have to get the actual cost of what the flight was there. And you know what, this stays for a few days and then for them to return. I can get that for the Committee.

Okay.

And then my last question, Chair, thank you. Is what kind of review is done for these teachers? Is it an annual review or do they have any type of review?

Good question. So annually, you know, once the position is filled, they are going through the teacher evaluation process on an annual basis. And then also because they are not a tenured teacher, every year on our teacher assignment and transfer program, those positions are posted.

It gives principals an opportunity to interview in a priority level, tenured teachers, licensed teachers. And then if they're unable to find a right candidate or right match, then at that point they may be able to continue the filling with a possible J1 teacher.

Okay, thank you. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much.

Members, any other questions? Vice Chair.

I think in line with those comments, I think first we can comment on HCSV's testimony that this Bill is unnecessary. And to clarify, the J1 teachers that. We currently have are hired under the. Emergency hire license, and that license expires after three years.

Correct. So currently, right now they are able to stay for up to three years under the emergency hire license unless they go through the requirements of the standards board to be able to qualify for a full license.

And for the purpose of this Bill. Is there an existing mechanism under either statute or rule that allows gives HTSB or DOE the authority to extend the three years to five years, to your knowledge?

Not to my knowledge that I'm aware of.

And so if they're not able to attain their license within three years, they're no longer employed or considered employable by. The Department, is that correct?

That's correct. Because they have to have an active license or permit that is issued from the state standards were eligible to be considered for continued employment.

And then as part of your evaluation process, do you currently collect data as. To which of these teachers are going through that certification requirement, tracking who's applying. For praxis or possibly failing around certain tests multiple times. Things that would address how there currently either is a bottleneck or some resistance to their pathway to achieving a license.

I can get you some of the numbers of, you know, where there are some teachers that are currently right now in their third year that may not be able to continue employment for next year to be able to do year four and year five.

It does come down to some of the practice and other types of requirements at this point right now. It's not necessarily that not all of them are always required, unable to pass the praxis, but you know, availability of testing sites. I know that some of the individuals are living in multi generational homes.

I think when they do have to proctor this test, they have to make sure that nobody else is in the room with them and other things like that. So there are some barriers that they are faced with at this point right now as we move forward in this process.

So you are collecting that data at year three. That's preventing or restraining the.

We are collecting some of the data and those that are able to move forward with the process by they've completed all the Standards Board requirements and then those that are working towards it at this point.

Thank you. And then final question, if you can. Provide that data with the Committee, please. And then final question is HCSB commented on two things. The first is that there's no existing similar program like this that's in place where they look at the where I think where an applicant is applying from.

But is this Bill modeled out of similar states or are you. Is this something that's currently, I guess possible in terms of visiting teachers from out of country?

So we've done some preliminary research just to see what other states are doing. There are multiple other states that are offering some type of international visitors permit. For example, I think, for example, I think Arizona offers an international teaching certificate that's valid for the entire length of the J1 visa.

It can be extended, but no longer More than 12 years, I believe. Also Texas has an international visitee visa or international visiting certificate. My understanding is available for the first three years. It can be extended to year four and five as long as they're in good standing with the Texas Standards Board.

So there are some other states that are operating it too.

Thank you. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Members, any other questions, please go ahead.

Thank you Chair. Question for DOE. So the Teacher Standard Board alluded to potentially predatory practices occurring with these J1 programs.

Is there a reporting process in place for these teachers to come forward to DOE and say, hey, this independent, no cost contractor is making me pay these fees and they're charging me high interest if I can't make the payment on time. Are there procedures in place to protect these J1 visa holders through DOE?

Definitely. So, you know, if there is something that they feel is happening that's inappropriate, we do have our confidential fraud and ethics hotline complaint. They could file that anonymously. We could definitely look into it if we had enough information. So there are procedures or safeguards in place if something shall be occurred, should be occurring like that.

And just one follow up. How many complaints have you guys received, say, calendar year to date? Any?

I don't have a number off the top of my head. I know that we did have the Federal Government come in a couple of years ago and did do a review and audit of the program, but nothing to my understanding, was discovered at that point.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Members, any other questions? When you said that the principals are asking for the J1s, was that based upon a survey or just in General?

It's in General. Overall, I think there, you know, our, our recruiters have really been reaching out to principals and it has been something that has been asked superintendents here too. I know he's heard some parts of the program itself.

Yeah. Chair, thank you for the question, Members. You know, having gone out and visited the schools across all the, all of the different islands, I can confidently say that the vast majority, if not all of the principals that I've talked to that have J1 teachers are satisfied, very satisfied with the teachers.

You know, they come to us with advanced degrees, either master's or doctoral degrees, and their content understanding is solved. As far as special education, we do have our educational specialists provide training for them. They're also part of our mentoring program. So we do, as all new teachers are.

So we do have mentoring components in place to support them. The enthusiasm that they bring to the classroom is just incredible. They bring a energy that is very motivating for students. And when I think about if our J1 teachers were not there, you know, we would have probably substitute teachers in there that are on day to day.

And so they provide what they provide for us for our students in the classrooms because it's very important. And so, as Bacian has shared, they bring a wealth of resources and excitement, I think, to the classroom. And so back to your question, cher.

Every teacher, every principal that I've talked to, I can say that has valued the G1 program.

I appreciate that. Why do you think then per the standards board's testimony that they're indicating that some of the educators are having challenges passing the praxis regarding English proficiency.

I don't. I don't have any. I didn't get any feedback from principals that shared concerns about any proficiency in English. Some J1 teachers do have a slight accent, but not, as far as I know, watching them in the classroom, not to the point where it would be difficult for students to understand what they're saying.

From where I sit and I listen. To them teach. I'm okay with it. I haven't heard anything with practice issues.

And I know that we've been trying to provide practice prep and practice support to the J1 teachers, you know, as an additional help and an additional resource to ensure that they are successful as we move forward.

How has that gone so far?

From my understanding, from what I've heard, it's gone well. This is our first year that we've been trying to offer the praxis support and prep to help them so that they would be able to stay up to the. The whole length of the visa, up to the full five years.

Thank you, Members. Any other questions?

Vice Chair, follow up for HTSB, please. Thank you so much. Thank you. I know you've raised the issue of the loan sharks before, but nothing in this video, similar to the Bill we heard last week, changes any of the licensure requirements, is that correct? That's correct.

So nothing would reduce or decrease the type of quality as to what we're trying to achieve, is that correct? Because the goal is that they.

It's just. I just feel. Well, the board just feels it's unnecessary because we already have things in place. That was basically what they wanted me to say.

But have you looked at some of these types of programs mentioned in terms of the visiting teachers offered by other states where if federally they are allowed to stay up to five years, there's a process in place for them. If meeting good standing requirements allow them to extend the three years. That's something the Department.

I mean, the board is open to looking at. We have looked at other states and see what they had in place, but what they had in place seem lesser than what we had in place. What do you mean by lesser? Well, it had less qualifications for the J1 visa holders, the visiting teachers.

Now, when I've looked at other countries too, because I looked at research and we were looking at what they require of visiting teachers, like from the US and they basically, in Japan, they put them in a classroom with another teacher. That's different than what's happening here.

They're being placed in special ed classrooms and elementary classroom which is concerning for us because that's like the foundational place where you need to have a quality teacher ready to go.

So if they're not able to pass what we already have in place, the practice, I'm glad DOE is offering them support now for studying, but that's a concern if they can't pass a writing practice.

Are you able to provide, provide the Committee with that research in terms of the comparison of your standards versus I guess what's being offered in Texas and in Arizona? Was it Arizona? Texas? Arizona, yes. If they have something that's currently working in place and create some pathway that.

Request stand meets a standard for them to enable to continue.

I can look at what they have and I can send you what they. What we found.

You just said that you compared you.

I did compare but. But what I found was sporadic. It was like not I'll send you what I have.

I'll send you what I have.

Okay.

I think the concern is just that again it's like this. We know there's, you know, we have been very consistent in your opposition and I think what the Committee would really like to see is some movement as to how we can those. That's why I think we're still waiting on some data.

But those wishing to extend, wishing to teach that they do meet those qualifications and we can get them to a pathway of licensure versus unintentionally creating all these restrictions and barriers and obstacles to. Get them to teach. Because at the end of the day.

When we no longer have any teachers and they've been in the classroom for three years, have had a relationship with the principal, have had a relationship with the school and are replaced by a substitute teacher. Right. And in that classroom resets who's who, you know, who suffers. Right. It's a class, it's a student.

And so I think we have this discussion and again and again and I think my ask is the Teacher Standards Board come with solutions to the Committee and offer something rather than constantly being. Right seeming like an obstacle. That's what we're trying to achieve. I think that's all we have to share.

Thank you Vice Chair. Members, any other questions? Thank you so much. Moving on to the last Bill of the day. We have HB 2294. This is with regards to DOE and TMK's. We only have one testifier, Superintendent testifying in support in person.

We rest on our support.

Thank you.... Okay, thank you so much. That's all we have. Members, any questions? Recess.

Okay, thank you so much.

We are reconvening for several bills. First up we have HB 2374. This is with regards to the Department of Education establishing a tree planting program for DOE campuses. This bill needs work. But the recommendation right now is to pass this with the HD1, defecting the date, which is July 1, 2000. Questions? Comments? Concerns? Vice Chair ... please.

Members voting on House Bill 2374. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendment. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. [Roll Call]. Thank you. Chair, your recommendations adopted.

Thank you, Members. Going on to the next Bill. HB 1925 Climate Literacy Certification Program. Members recommendation is that HD1, starting up on page two, line five. We'll change the ... to a may as in may establish again. We will be back July 1st. Questions? Comments? Concerns? Vice Chair for the vote.

Members voting on House Bill 1925. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye, noting all Members present. Are there any Members which wishing to vote with reservation? Any Members wishing to vote no? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Members, going on to the next Bill HB 2147. This is the proposed ... to help fund public education. Members in the preamble starting off with page two line 17 through 21 and then continue on page three lines one through 14. We're going to delete off that paragraph as I have a different take on it.

Also Members, we will add a definition for surcharge to mean additional charge prescribed by a tax. Because you know fool me once, fool me twice. No, besides that defecting the dates July 1, 3000. Questions? Comments? Concerns? Vice Chair for the vote.

Okay. Members voting on House Bill 2147. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any Members wishing to vote with reservation? Any Members wishing to vote no? Okay. Seeing none, Chair recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Members going on to the next Bill which is HB 2391 GET Tax Holiday for school supplies - on school supplies, I should say. First off, regarding the definitions found on page four. This is with regards to bags, clothing and school supplies. Recommendation is to add default language in front of those paragraphs saying including but not limited to, as to broaden what is covered, as per the testimony concerns. Also we'll add a July 1, 3000 defective date.

Also they pulled into the Committee report that we're going to request that ECD if they choose to consider the proposal that they look at the language with regards to itemized receipts. I don't know if all retailers do that. So, we want them to take a look at that. And then if it passes ECD goes on to FN, we're going to ask them to look at Dept of Tax's recommendation because this Committee is not going to address any of that. It's outside of our scope. Questions? Comments? Concerns? Vice Chair for the vote please.

Members voting on House Bill 2391. Chair's recommendation is pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any Members wishing to vote with reservation? Any Members voting no? Seeing none, chair recommendation is adopted.

Thank you Members. Going to the next Bill HB 1672. I think this bill is premature so we're going to defer. Moving on to the next Bill HB 2301 this is with regards to private trade vocational licensure. Members had a conversation with the higher ed Chair and we both concur that this should be handled by DCCA. So the recommendation is to change the implementing agency from University of Hawaii to DCCA. That's the organization that handles most of our licensure and then will defect the date to July 1, 3000. Question? Comments? Concerns?

Chair. Just wanted to thank you for the recommendation. As noted, it is an EDN higher ed CPC triple referral with that recommendation no longer applying to the University. I'll wave off on that and have it go directly to CPC which has jurisdiction over DCCA. Thank you Chair.

That makes sense. Thank you so much. Any other questions or comments? Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 2301, Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair Vote aye. Any Members voting will be reservation? Any Members voting no? Chair your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Members going on to the next Bill HB 1997 this is with regards to IEPs and emergency situations and evacuations. The recommendation is HD1. First what specific mentioned to EOs being responsible for these particular duties. We want to want to take that out and just make it broadly referring to the school in general. It's tricky when you attach a responsibility to a position in statute, it causes some challenges. So we'll make it more general and then we'll just simply defect the date to July 1st, 3000. Questions? Comments? Concerns? Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 1997. Chair's recommendations is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any Members voting with reservation? Any Members voting no? Seeing none. Chair.

Recommendation's adopted. Thank you, Members. Going on to the next Bill HB 1561 free meals with certain income brackets. This is with regards to charter schools. Good Bill. Recommendation is to pass this, just defecting the date. Questions? Comments? Concerns? Vice Chair for the vote, please.

Chair voting on House Bill 1561. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair Vote aye. Any Members voting with reservation? Any Members voting no? Chair recommendation is adopted.

Thank you.

Members, moving on to HB 1779. This is universal student meals in the future at DOE. Members, we're going to accept charter schools language to make sure that we include them in this proposal. And besides that, we'll defect the date to July 1st, 3000. Questions, comments, concerns? Vice Chair for the vote please.

Members, voting on House Bill 1779. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendment. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any Members voting with reservation? Any Members voting no? Chair, seeing none.

Your recommendation is adopted. Thank you, Members. Moving on to the next Bill HB 2296 minimum recovery requirements and student meals. Recommendation is to pass this with the HD1. First on page two lines eight and nine. We're going to revert this back to our language from last year which is not less to not more than the supplements of change technical non sub changes also and then defecting the date is July 1st, 3000. Questions? Comments? Concerns? Vice Chair for the vote, please.

Members voting on House Bill 2296. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Any Members voting with reservation? Any Members voting no? Seeing none, Chair recommendation is adopted.

Thank you.