Senate Standing Committee on Housing

Welcome to hearing with Senate Committee on Economic Development Tourism. Today is Tuesday, February 10th, 2026. This is our 1:00pm agenda. We're in Conference Room 2 to 9. This hearing is being streamed live on YouTube.

In the unlikely event that we must abruptly end this hearing due to technical difficulties, the Committee will reconvene on Thursday, February 121:00pm in Conference Room 2 to 9. This agenda has one Bill. We are here for decision making on SB2045 relating to combat sports. Okay, so Senate Bill 2045 relating to combat sports.

We are passing with an SD1 by adopting DCCA's request regarding board or commission composition and adopting the Boxing Commission's recommendations by clarifying that the required on site medical professional is a licensed physician. Clarifying when and under what circumstances a deputy combat sports commissioner is to submit a written report removing language relating to a combat sports registry.

Clarifying the payment requirements for licensed promoters and removing the ambulance requirement. Clarifying that a licensed physician be on site and that an inspector coordinates in advance with the nearest emergency room or hospital. And clarifying that the mandate for the commission to appoint inspectors making technical, non substantive amendments as necessary and defecting the date to July 12050. Any discussions? Seeing none. Vice chair for the vote. Chair votes Aye.

Let's get ready to rumble. Chair votes yes. Senator Wakai votes yes. Senator Fukunaga is excused. Senator Kim, excuse. Senator Favela. Aye. Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. And with that, we are adjourned.

Hello, and welcome to the joint hearing with the Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism and Senate Committee on Housing. This is our 1:01pm agenda. We have a 2 minute time limit for all testifiers. And this agenda has one bill, Senate Bill 2187, relating to the Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism.

We have one testifier providing comments today, Director Tokioka from Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism. Okay. I don't see... Oh, Dennis, are you testifying on behalf of Director Tokioka? 2186. I mean 87. Here you want mine?

This is... Oh, well, I think we stand on our testimony. Did I miss... I'm sorry. DBEDT stands on its written testimony.

Okay, I'll take that. Okay. Anybody else wishing to testify on Senate Bill 2187? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Okay. Seeing none. Okay. Members, we are going to pass with an SD 1. Making any technical, non-substantive amendments as necessary and changing the effective date to July 1, 2050. Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

I vote yes. [Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

For the Committee on Housing, same recommendation for Senate Bill 2187, to pass with amendments. Chair votes aye.

Members, SB 2187. Chair's recommendation pass with amendment. Chair votes aye. I vote aye. [Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. With that, we are... Oh, okay, sorry. I got... Sorry, sorry. On the amendments. Wait, let me just... Passing with an SD and making any technical, non-substantive amendments as necessary. Changing the effective date to July 1, 2060. Okay, we gotta revote on it or... Okay, we're taking the vote again. Chair goes aye. Vice chair for the vote.

I vote yes. [Roll Call] All right, Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Same recommendation for the Committee on Housing for Senate Bill 2187, to pass with amendments. Chair votes aye.

Members, SB 2187. Chair's recommendation pass with amendments. Chair votes aye. Any Members voting with reservations? Any Members voting no? With all others voting aye, recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Members. With that, we are adjourned.

Aloha and welcome to the hearing with Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism. This is our 1:02pm agenda and we have a 1 minute time limit for our testifiers. And we have various agendas to get through this afternoon. This agenda has eight bills. First up is Senate Bill 2072 relating to tourism.

First up, Director Tokioka for Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism.

Yep, DBET stand on its written testimony.

Thank you. Next up, Randall John Francisco on behalf of EDT, in support. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure. Seeing none, Members any questions?

Question to DBET.

Senator Kim.

Question. What's the cost benefit would be for us? I mean how much is it and what, what do we expect to gain?

Well, for one thing I think we need to point out there are no - there's no Michelin star restaurant in Hawaii. So I think the difficulty would be in selecting restaurants to feature. And therefore I think while DBET supports the intent of this measure, it would be difficult to to do.

Then why are you supporting this?

I think because it's not an administrative Bill, but we. It's not an administrative Bill, but we support the intent.

Again, I, you know, I always have a hard time when you guys support the intent because why are we putting. Why would we put laws on the books when maybe there's no way of it being of benefit or what the cost is? What is the cost?

I would think the cost would be minimal. It would be maybe $5,000.

For what?

For, to come up with a list and it would be that while there are no Michelin star restaurants in Hawaii there have been some recommendations for Michelin star restaurants. But I would. I think the difficulty with going to is there are - they are opinions and you know it'd be sort of, how should we say subjective if you select someone's opinion over someone else's.

Right. So this is like, like a yelp in a sense that Michelin recommends certain restaurants and do those restaurants get more more attention than others?

I would think they get some recognition, yeah.

Yeah but okay. I just have a hard time understanding this measure, the need for it. I don't care, I'm just.

Senator Favella.

So what is the potential - if we established this 5,000 dollar list what is the potential of the return.

For one restaurant maybe.

Well actually no restaurants because nobody has a store and nobody is.

This is being done in other areas, right? I mean other places, right?

So what is the statistics? And I mean of course Hawaii is very different than any place else. But what is - when they had established this what was the initial cost? Right, you're saying 5,000 here but what was the initial cost? But they started it in there in the continent and what was the return to the place?

Yeah, they have.

Frankly I don't know of any place that has promoted their Michelin star restaurant.

Okay, thank you.

Anybody, any other questions? Okay, seeing none. Thanks Dennis. Moving on to Senate Bill 3049 relating to Trade RNA Production Capacity Grant program. First up DBET.

Yep DBET stands in its written testimony in support.

Thank you. Next up, Hawaii Technology Development Corporation Trung Lam.

Good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. HTDC stands on its written testimony.

Thank you. Next up, Lauren Zirbel testifying for Hawaii Food Industry Association on zoom.

Not present on zoom, Chair.

Thank you. Pam Tumpat, Maui Chamber of Commerce, in support. William Anonsen for The Maritime Group, in support. Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau, also in support. Sherry Menor, Chamber of Commerce.

Good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Chamber of Commerce stands on it's written testimony in support.

Thank you. Next up Randall John Francisco, individual also in support. Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure. Seeing none, Members any questions?

Question to DBEDT. Can't you folks do this without a Bill?

Not. No. Grant making authority does not rest with DBEDT.

What does it rest with?

I think there is HTDC has a grant making authority. Our CBET program has a grant making authority but it's limited to nonprofit companies.

So when you say grant making authority what exactly are we talking about?

I think it has to be in statute that this program allows you to select individual companies, individual companies to make grants to without going through the procurement process.

So basically, we're allowing you, DBEDT, to give money to private companies without going through procurement, Is that what you're saying?

Yes.

So why, why, why would we want to do this?

Well, a grant is selecting qualified companies to determine if they are - meet the requisite rules that are promulgated.

Right, but I mean, what prompts this measure? What need is out there that we aren't seeing already or doing without this measure?

There are no grant programs.

Right. So is there a need for a grant program is what I'm asking.

Especially for the startup companies, yes.

Okay, so right now HCDC is the one that gives grants.

For manufacturing companies, but they have to be at a certain level of operation.

Okay, and do you folks have the capacity to do this without any more bodies creating another whole set of bureaucracy?

We have in the past given out SBA grants to businesses for marketing purposes, because the SBA rules made us - did not allow for manufacturers, but for marketing purposes. So we were able to do that.

Okay, but you didn't answer my question. So what are the needs? I mean, do you folks have the capacity as far as bodies without growing government to do this?

Yes, we do.

Okay, so why is there a blank amount appropriate on the General Fund?

Oh, we recommended 300,000 as a good start.

Well, that's why I ask you, is it going to take you money or whatever? You said you have it within your already.

Oh, the capacity, the human resource capacity, not the financial capacity to make the ground.

Right. You want bureaucracy.

We don't have the financial capacity for it.

Okay, so you're going to add on when you guys cannot even do some of the other things that you folks supposed to be doing to keeping track of HTA and everything else that's going.

Uh that I can't answer to.

Okay, I don't think you guys made a good enough argument why we need this.

Can you guys provide examples of businesses that may be interested in applying for the grants provided in this Bill?

Sure, we can. You know, some of the grants that we made or micro loans that we've made to companies that are fairly new, instead of a loan which was for a small amount could benefit from a grant program. And we can provide some names of companies that have benefited.

In regards to - what's the expectancy of the matching funds on behalf of the state and then the applicant.

The matching funds. For instance, through our CBD loan program, we make loans with partners who also put in a certain amount of money to lend. So it's leveraged. The state money is leveraged with the private sector money. And we think that perhaps this could be done with the grant program to have a private sector entity or non profit entity also match or be partnered with this program.

So if the state appropriated 300,000, how would you guys go about selecting who will receive those grants and try prioritizing?

We would have to develop rules for that, you know, at this point to determine which would be the main beneficiaries of this. I would think it would be the smaller business, not a startup, not one that is just starting up or one that has somewhat of a track record.

Not too, not too, you know, sophisticated of a track record, but one that has shown that they have the ability to continue with the business.

So between you guys and HTDC, would it be better to push it towards HTDC?

I think the HTDC manufacturing a grant program is a very good grant program and if anything that should continue because it is for those that have more of a proven track record.

So you guys would be like not new startup but the one right in between. We're just kind of trying to help them get over the hump of advancement. Is that what you guys looking at? Any other questions?

Yes, further questions. So why wouldn't we just want to expand what HTDC is doing instead of creating a whole 'nother bureaucracy for you guys to then. And then the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. Right.

That, that makes a lot of sense.

Then why do you guys want to take on more? That's my whole thing.

I think it's because it's an unserved population at the moment.

Yeah, but there are other places we can put it instead of with DBEDT to create a whole new grant thing when we already have a grant entity. Right.

Yeah. Well, you know, there are, I think the HTDC and correct me if I'm wrong, Trung, is limited to manufacturers.

Well, we can change that. Why can't we change that? We're changing this now to give it, you guys startup when you're not really doing it. So why couldn't we, why couldn't we change their entity?

Yes. So our, our manufacturing systems program is slightly different. This program where we provide a 20% rebate on equipment and training. This Bill provides more flexibility, includes infrastructure. And this Bill specifically focuses on export manufacturers as opposed to our manufacturing program covers the variety of all manufacturing happy in Hawaii.

Yeah. Why can't you expand if we allow you to?

I think the challenge of expanding is that, you know, for HDTC, we're trying to be good stewards of state taxpayer dollars and we want to focus those resources in the areas we think we can have the largest economic impact.

Okay, so there's no economic impact. We give it to DBEDT and there's no real economic impact then? If you guys think there's no economic impact, why would then we.

I think there's a lot of potential economic impact for export focused areas. It's just for HTDC that is just not the areas we are focused on. We're focused on developing.

I understand, but why can't we focus on that? Why can't you focus?

I think when you try to focus on too many different things at the same time, you get diluted.

Okay, how many things is DBEDT focusing on right now? Do you have any idea?

I don't think I can speak on behalf of.

No, but I'm just saying they just got housing now. Anything? You got everything. Kitchen sink. So we're adding one more thing.

I will also add. There's a HTDC is currently funding the manpower for this program through federal dollars with our MEP. And that program has been unfunded since September with potential funding happening. It's still up in the air through March and hopefully for one more year. So the question of will HTDC even have the manpower to run this program in the future is currently in question as well.

Well, they're asking for 300,000 to give them manpower. We could give it to you guys. I mean, I'm just trying to see how we make government efficient instead of having all these little pockets and all these new positions and then we can't fill the positions and then. Yeah, it's just, I don't know that we look at the broad picture in doing stuff. We're so tunnel vision. I mean, we have GIAs, we have grants. A lot of these companies come in for grants, Right. Or can come in for grants. Right.

I don't know if it is to support their private enterprise.

We have a lot of private entities come in for GIAs. So. Anyway.

Okay, thank you. Okay, Next up, Senate Bill 3166 relating to Hawaii Technology Development Corporation. First up, Trung Lam, Hawaii Technology Development Corporation

HTDC stands on its written testimony.

Thank you. Next up, Lauren Zurbel on Zoom for Hawaii Food Industry Association. Not present on Zoom Chair. Thank you. Next up, Clara Lee, testifying for Normal Corporation. Hello.

Hello. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members. Sorry, I'm a little nervous.

She's scared. Everybody get nervous. She's just asking questions.

My name is Clara. I'm here on behalf of Normal Corporation in support of SB 3166. We were actually recipients of the HTDC MAP grants in 2024, and we are a startup in Kailua. We were founded in Kailua and our headquarters are still there. We are a high tech manufacturing firm. We manufacturing air conditioning and heat pump units in Kailua.

And so I just want to share my support of appropriating funds to the MAP grant program. We were able to get assistance from them, like I said, in 2024. And other than, you know, manufacturing heat pump units, our bigger mission is to bring manufacturing back to the islands so that we're not in a place where we depend on exports. And because that puts companies in a position where we have to spend money on shipping, on tariffs.

And I think Hawaii could be a lot more self sufficient if we had a more developed manufacturing economy here. The second mission that we have is to bring jobs back to Hawaii so that engineers, kids with higher degrees are not leaving the islands for the mainland. So we have over 80% of our workforce are UH Manoa grads, and we provide them with well paying jobs, careers as engineers, as electricians, as mechanical engineers. So that's why I came and supported the bill. Thank you.

Next up, Valerie Harmon for Nāmaka Algae in support. Carlo Liquido for testifying for Piʻikū Company in support. Charlie Field, PacMar Technologies, in support. Nam Vu for Coworking Hawaii in support. Anthony John Escasa, Pacific Impact Zone, in support. Grace Iwashita, Hawaiian King Candies LLC, in support. Batdelger Jaavaa with Purdyco, Ltd dba Island Princess, in support. Charna Rae Naeole, Coffees of Hawaii, in support. Chamber of Commerce in support. Thank you. Doreen Wong.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I stand in support of my written testimony.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify on the measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Oh, Senator Fevella.

She's already us too. Oh, I guess you hear you. Sorry. The question that I have is, I mean, I see this support for it, and I understand the need for it. But why is the appropriations for the 500,000 for third party consultant necessary instead of utilizing existing... Oh, is that the next one? Sorry. Sorry. Okay. Are we... I'm good.

Okay. So yeah. So the bill provides 100,000 in appropriation to fund an advanced manufacturing and cyber security specialty position. Was there a problem in getting the position funded in the supplemental budget request?

When I joined HTDC, I was not able to get in the admin package. And at that time, the MAP program, which is currently what we use to do our advanced manufacturing and our manufacturing initiatives, was still in existence. So since that time, the MAP has kind of been more uncertain. So I thought the best way forward to ensure we support advanced manufacturing, which supports all sectors we're focused on, including ocean and space, was to make sure we asked for a position.

Thank you. Moving on to Senate Bill 3167, relating to Hawaii Technology Development Corporation. First up, Trung Lam with Hawaii Technology.

Stand on our written testimony.

Next up, Jimmy Freese, testifying for AI FISH Incorporated.

Yeah, AI FISH stands on our written testimony, HTDC has been an immense help for high tech companies like mine.

Thank you. Next up, Noah Pentelovitch, testifying for Hohonu on Zoom.

Yeah, thank you. My name is Noah. I'm the head of hardware for Hohonu. I stand by my testimony. Hohonu is a local technology company offering flood intelligence solutions, including designing and manufacturing flood sensors.

Here in Hawaii, we're in a strong position to grow and thrive, but as we grow, we will be constrained by local availability of specialized talent, availability of local suppliers capable of scaling with us, and logistics challenges related to both fulfillment of orders and imports of necessary components. These challenges are neither unique to HOHONU nor new.

HTDC is well positioned to address these problems across a Blue Economy cluster and we have a better chance of solving them by bringing expertise and focus. We believe Senate Bill 3167 will enable that collaboration success and we strongly support its passage.

Thank you. Next up, Tonga testifying for Chamber of Commerce Hawaii. Thank you. George Yarborough, individual in person, in support, knowing that. Doreen Wong. Aloha.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and esteemed Members of the Committee, mahalo for your time and consideration of my testimony. I stand in support of my written testimony. I also wanted to highlight my background. So I'm here representing myself. I'm an Ocean Technology and Innovation Advisor.

I'm also a part of a wide range of global and regional networks supporting ocean innovation and technology solutions. Over the last several years we've seen other states who have stand up to build their ecosystems, including in Washington, Oregon, San Diego, California, which has a population size of 1.4 million, very similar to Hawaii, as well as in Alaska.

I stand in support of this because I urge that we really prioritize and bring in expert support to really help catalyze the work here in Hawaii. Mahalo. Thank you.

Next up, Jacob Wiencek, individual support. Then we have 18 other individuals that are also in support of this measure. Anybody else wishing to testify on the measure seeing none. Members, any questions? Senator Fevella.

Just going to quickly. So why are we playing with a third party consultant and not utilizing their expertise within HTDC or the University of Hawaii?

As you can see by the variety of testimony, the ocean tech sector here is pun intended, vast. And the challenge with Hawaii is we need to make sure everyone is working in a coordinated fashion.

And by allowing us to bring in third party consultants, we can utilize the expertise of folks, whether it's facilitation work or the strategic planning in order to make sure that we are all moving together in the same direction as a state when it comes to our ocean tech strategy.

So the question is that we don't have anybody that we can bring in the HTDC at university internally.

We don't have anyone HTDC with the ocean tech at the university. I think there's expertise when it relates to like individual ocean technology. But in terms of expertise of bringing everyone together in a coordinated fashion, I am unaware of anyone that can do that.

The thing is, you know, you heard in other hearings again we, we're getting consulted here. Consultant that a consultant is consulting a consultant. You know, we just kind of sort of working within. Yeah, you know what I mean? So my next question, quick one then.

Well, the statewide blue economy strategy for economy especially protection trades local local ocean industry and small scale fishery and agriculture within these things able to strategize and include these specific people with their local economy.

Correct. When we do the strategic plan, we're going to be inclusive of all aspects that make sense for Hawaii to focus.

On the reason why this. Again, I don't want to keep harping on this. It finds really hard time to find out that we don't have somebody that can with the expertise and we're surrounded by water and whatnot and we will get somebody who probably surrounded by forests coming over here and telling us about our water.

So it just kind of, kind of bothers me that we're gonna get a third party consultant and then we cannot try to see if we can find somebody here in the islands or within the apartment where you say Kenau or a university that could actually tackle this. I'm pretty sure we have a good program at the university.

Our intention would be to find someone based in Hawaii.

Thank you Chair.

Senator Kim.

So have you contacted the University of Hawaii at Hilo, Soas, DLNR?

Specifically about this or just in General about the ocean Tech sector?

No, about this, about providing, providing information regarding it.

Since I started HTDC, we've held multiple sessions around the ocean Tech ecosystem and we brought folks from all these sectors to the Entrepreneur Sandbox to meet and discuss. And one thing they clearly said was they needed someone to help coordinate everyone together. It's a clear need from the university, from the private sector. Everyone told us the same thing.

Okay, so there's nobody in your realm that can do that? Coordinate somebody or you can hire somebody to coordinate.

We currently do not have any vacant positions to hire anyone to fill.

Yeah, but you're asking for money to hire an outsider. Right?

Right. Because we, we don't have any, any positions to hire. So we would need.

Hiring consultants sometimes duplicates existing public capacity and then it sends a message that we don't have any trust in our own institutions. I mean we shouldn't be bypassing them because when you say a third party party consultant, we don't know where that third party consultant can come from.

And then if they come from, the mainland consultants leave when the contract ends, they take the institutional knowledge with them and the state remains dependent upon outside firms, which is clearly what's happening in a lot of our departments right now.

Which is why we have a Bill that looking at hiring of these consultants and then consultant contracts usually exceed initial budgets and then non measurable deliverables and then the reports that they, that they put out sits on the shelf for long periods of time. So I guess those are the concerns I have. Madam Chair.

The only comment I have is I think I was brought onto this position to make sure any strategic plan we create does not sit on a shelf.

So you're going to force us to read it? You're going to force them to.

It would be for HTDC to implement the plan.

Okay. Yeah. Well, hope so. We will hold you accountable.

Please do.

Trung, so to what extent does HTDC support a blue economy initiatives?

Blue economy is our top two priorities. It's ocean and space. So we definitely need this blue economy strategy in order to move forward.

So there's another Bill that seeks to establish an Office of Marine Affairs in HTDC. So why do we need a consultant?

I think that Bill was introduced after this Bill is introduced and I'm happy to have a conversation about that Bill when we have that hearing. I think they're very complimentary. And this Bill is about a consultant which is a one year commitment of funds. I think the other Bill asked for a Full time equivalent for HTDC.

So in the first Office of Marine affairs established in 1974 and DBEDT published a report, Hawaii and the Sea, which contains similar objectives relating to ocean related economic development. So what this Bill proposes is not new. What have we done in the past 52 years since the report was published?

Yeah, so I mean that would be.

Helpful for us to know. Can get back to.

So another report that sat on the shelf for all these years.

Thank you. Any other? Senator Wakai.

I think the community definitely needs this report and the findings here. My concern though is just the $500,000 figure. I mean I remember Hatch did a very comprehensive aquaculture report, I want to say two years ago and I'm pretty sure it was not nearly as expensive as this.

How did you come up with the 500 grand?

I think it's estimates based on different roles to take an idea of like the blue economy. How do we gather the folks, how do we do the right research necessary and how do we involve enough stakeholders so that when we come up with a comprehensive plan, we have the support of everyone in the ecosystem?

Obviously it's an estimate. Right. And if we are able to work for less than that, I think we can find a way.

So you know, if this Bill moves on, I think that you should have some conversations with other people who have done kind of similar type studies and find out how much of it do you can you take from that so you don't have to reinvent the entire wheel on aquaculture per se, which I know is only a small segment of this entire comprehensive look, and then come back with a better figure.

Because I just think $500,000 is too rich for this consultant.

I understand. Thank you.

Thank you. Senator Favela.

Yes. The consultants are not subject to public service ethics and in the same way directly accountable to the voters, primarily invested in the community outcome. You see what I'm saying? You can get a consultant. Are they going to be subject to like what we're subject to? Okay, let me say this again.

So they're directly accountable to the voters.

I think what he's saying is that whereas employees of the departments are subject to us, but account ethics consultants, outside consultants are not bound by ethics, is that what you're saying?

Yes, they're, they're, they will not be state employees.

You let me put that in a Bill.

No, I think why again, why wouldn't we hire somebody to bring people together, local expertise and hire them to be on staff if that's so important and the blue economy is so important that why wouldn't we have that instead of consultant that can add fees and cost more than paying somebody here in our local economy?

I think the role of the consultant, we're asking for it for one year so they can help us draft this strategy. But once we have a clear direction then we would come to leg to ask for the position. And fortunately there is another Bill during this leg session that assigns a full time equivalent to hcdc.

So there are options and we're willing to work with legs to figure out what the best path forward.

We rely too much on consultants.

Just one more follow up chair. You know, just our determination for the, you know having again a consultant primarily with native Hawaii knowledge. You know, again having treat our Ikki Kupuna stakeholders input, you know, cultural knowledge. We don't have long term, you know and failure to again center community stewardship. So again, you know we're talking.

When you're talking about ocean like that, I understand what you're saying. Having this consultant to organize these people. Yeah, but you got to understand ocean everything the Aina everything comes good culture. Yeah.

100%.

You're gonna have somebody over here from Whiteville. I mean it might be racist, but for someplace else they're not gonna have any for our people. Every time we left out right. We come to our EV Kapuna or anything like that, is it gonna be left out?

So again that's why we try to emphasize that if you have, if you let us give you guys 500,000 right to do this. Okay. And you don't have the capability of having this person within over there. Did you come up with one situation that you would want to hire?

Talk to us here as legislator, get one Bill to put in to specify in your Department or go to DHRD and see if you guys can put this together in words to have somebody here locally.

Yeah. I would just add that for HTDC a key part of our strategy is very much inclusive of native Hawaiian values and regenerative framework. Like it's very important to me that that's front and center of everything we do here at HTDC.

Right. So again that's the only, the only thing. So I mean you guys got to put this together when it comes to the industry. But again the question that I have is that moving forward with the 500,000, don't you think that would be good to look into?

I mean again, you know we have a lot of positions that is not filled in a lot of Department. But wouldn't you think this would be important enough to maybe put in a Bill or ask for a position like this within the Department

I agree.

Because if you think if it's that important to the community in organizing and you was having all of these discussions about with the guys in the sandbox and what he was going to put into perspective, and you really needed this position because you needed really to put somebody together. I don't know when you had the meeting, right.

I don't know when you had the meeting. So if you had the meeting, you, if you thought it was something that you really needed, you could have put in a Bill, ask the chair or, you know, whatever, DHRD to see if we can get a position within your Department.

And then we're going to have somebody at least is accountable to all. What I just had asked about earlier. Right.

Happy to agree with that direction moving forward as well. Thank you.

Last question. How many consultants are you looking for? Just one.

This would be for multiple consultants.

Multiple consultants. Okay, now, yeah, because I see that in your thing. So why you need multiple consultants?

I think based on the conversation, we might require different skill sets from a consultant that maybe if you pick one, you're really relying them to be a jack of all trades.

And for us to really have meaningful impact, we need to make sure we have the right expertise depending on the topic or the focus of the conversation at the time.

So again, you don't have the University of Hawaii. You can't get multiple ideas from the University of Hawaii from locals already. Okay, you know what? You don't have to answer that. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Moving on to Senate Bill 3168, testifying for Hawaii Technology Development Corporation, Trumg Lam.

Stand on our testimony.

Thank you. Next up, Lauren Zurbel Hawaii Food Industry Association on Zoom. Not present on Zoom. Chair. Thank you. Next up, Clara Lee in support. Thank you. Pam Tunpap in support, from our Chamber of Commerce, Barbara Logan for Uncle's Ice Cream.

And support, Charlie Field, Parmac Technologies in support, Carlo Linguido PE Cool Company in support.

We have nine other people in support. Oh, as well as... Sorry, Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii. Thank you. And then Doreen Wong. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify on the measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Senator Fevella.

It says the uncertainty of the federal money and all that. So how are we going to ensure that the matching fund is available exact moment when the federal awards is made if we're not certain what's happening? Because we're asking if the $10 million funded are depleted by high value grants in a single fiscal year, what mechanism is existing to replenish it before the next legislative session?

I didn't think that far through that. So that'd be great if we were able to deplete those funds in one year and then have to worry about replenishing within that same fiscal year. I would imagine if we were able to do what we said we're going to do, which is bring in a lot of federal dollars to match with these state dollars, that the following year when we come back with the ask to replenish, it would look very alleged that we were able to bring in so many federal dollars to the state of Hawaii.

So how secure is... I don't think I use that word secure, but how good feeling you might have about security of federal dollars?

Well, I will say in the last three to five years, Hawaii has missed out on about $300 million of federal grants when it comes to economic development. And we currently have an eye on about $100 million coming in the next year or two that we could potentially win. So I tend to be optimistic that we can bring in the federal dollars that would require the state match.

Thank you, Chair. Appreciate it.

Any other questions? Trung, how much in federal grants have you guys attracted and how much in state matching funds did you need to obtain?

So the... Gosh, I wish I had a total number. I can get you the total number, but depending on the different programs. So under MAP... Or sorry, MAP, we get about $800,000 a year that requires a 50% match. A lot of that can be in kind. So it's not just cash.

SSBCI, which is our federal money that we get for venture capital, we don't have to require a match, but it requires a 50% match from the venture capital firms that receive that money. And that's, the SSBCI program is $60 million, but our venture side is about $20 million.

So the bill requesting 10 million in general funds for deposit into the revolving fund. So how much in federal funds would that get for the state?

It could get a one to one match. It could be 20, but up to... Because some federal bills only require a 20% match. So it could be a 5x leverage.

Thank you. Any other questions? Seeing none. Moving on to Senate Bill 3227 relating to Hawaii Technology Development Corporation first up, Trung Lam Hawaii Technology Development

Stand on our written testimony.

Thank you. Next up, Clara Lee. Thank you. Next up, Valerie Harmon testify for Namaka LG in support. Again, we have. 15. Sorry, 15. 15 other people in support. Oh, sorry. Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii.

Good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair Hawaii Chamber of Commerce stands on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. Doreen Wong.

Aloha, stand in support of the bill.

Thank you. Indian Randall. John Francisco also in support. Anybody else wishing to testify on the measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Senator Kim.

So the monies you're requesting, approximately how much?

I believe it's asking for $1 million for each of the three programs.

One million each?

Yes.

Okay. And you don't have any training programs now?

Small business training, accelerator programs, or just training programs?

We do a lot of training for these training programs. I want to know. You don't have. You don't do any training now?

We do small business training that we get through federal funding which is around accounting, legal and financial training. We are currently running through this accelerator. So we have funding for this year for the accelerator program that we're going through the review process for companies that apply for that program.

We have some training through Department of Energy for energy efficiency. We're working through as well. So we have multiple training programs currently, but not the same as what this program does.

So you don't have training for manufacturing assistance program.

The manufacturing assistance program also covers training in the cost of that for the equipment that they purchase.

So you have training already for that?

If the they. So the companies go out and get the training and we reimburse them 20%.

Okay. So I guess I'm wondering what is this money going for? Million dollars each program, that's $3 million.

So they're all kind of different. So the HSBIR program matches companies that are awarded federal SBIR grants, so allows them to continue their work with money that's much more, I guess, flexible than what the Federal Government gives them. So it helps support them as they develop their technology and commercialize it. Excuse me. For the map.

The million dollars is a pass through 20% grant rebate that reimburses companies 20% for their equipment, training.

Yeah, equipment and training costs for the, for their equipment and then the small business training slash accelerator funds companies going out there doing small business training and they can come in with a RFP for what they're offering, what type of training they're offering. So it varies.

So this is new, right?

These are the same three core programs that HTDC has had.

Right, but the monies. Have you asked monies every year for these programs?

Correct. We ask for funding every year for these programs.

So million dollars every year to run these training programs? All three?

Yes.

Thank you.

Any other questions? Senator Wakai.

Trung I want to focus on SBIR and manufacturing because I see the necessity for us to help in these two areas. But what to me is still troublesome is that you see the same cast of characters feeding year after year after year.

And they don't spin out companies, they just ask for money, help get researchers paid in their organization.

I mean, as you, if, if you get any amounts of monies here, can we tighten this up so that, you know, you get to bite at the apple in 2026, you don't come back and bite at that same apple in 27 and later years.

You, you have to like sit on the bench for a year or two years or what have you. Because it's, it's, it's the usual folks, right? The ocean heads, the Pacific marine guys are always feeding. There's not a look you're not touching various sectors of our economy. It's the same people who are feeding year after year.

How do we get to helping spread this fertilizer around to more companies that might need some assistance?

Thank you for that question. So this is for SBIR 2 and 3. So this is for companies that have gotten SBIR level 1 and they've extended, taken the next step towards commercialization. The federal program, SBI program is currently being reset as well.

And they're trying to encourage less of that repeat SBIR mill type of behavior and more encouraging companies to go into commercialization. So on the federal side, they're really pushing that way. So companies that win federal SBIR will have already been vetted to be like, okay, you have a higher chance of commercializing.

But I will say like, commercialization is really hard. Innovation is really hard. So I don't want to disincentivize companies to keep trying. Even if they get some federal dollars and they try to commercialize and they don't make it, I don't want to penalize them to not try again.

I do want to encourage more companies to apply who are newer so that more companies can benefit from this program. So I think the way we have it set up, we do have a preference towards first time applicants in our scoring mechanism.

So if we can encourage that more and have more companies applying, I think you will see less of a concentration in Hawaii.

But still after years, I don't know how many years we've been funding SBIR and I think the MAP one is within the past six years or so that nobody has spun out a company from any of this. We're just funding researchers in the companies that are in the technology sector.

I mean, this thing has to be focused on, you know, ocean and not to pick on them or Pacific Marine.

Here's a chunk of money and we have an expectation that you're going to like create jobs, not more research jobs within your own company, but you're going to spin something out and show the public that there was a good investment of taxpayer monies to grow the economy. None of that is taking place.

All we're doing is continuing to fund researchers. How do we get to that? How do we get to the greater good that if we cannot continue to fund research for the sake of research, we have the University of Hawaii to do that. Your job is to help grow the economy.

Correct.

And we're not growing the economy by giving these guys a million dollars to eat on every year.

I think that's up to us at HTDC to ensure that we provide the services to support these companies beyond just this SBIR match. Like what? How do we connect you to the right customers? What services do you need in order to take it to that next level? And it's important for us to.

Again, part of our strategy is to be the field catalyst and look at the whole ecosystem and the whole cycle of going from incubation to R&D to commercialization, all the way to the end user and growing our economy because we are very much focused on that.

I think this is a piece of the puzzle that we should keep. But you're right, we should do more to ensure that the resources, we get them now aren't wasted.

Okay, thank you, Trung.

Senator Favela.

Okay, so just along with a question to that. So since this program, like Senator Wakai said, every year, how much did we grow in a manufacturing? How much did we grow since you said you'd be coming every year, right, for this and we've been getting manufactured, how much new manufacturing jobs since this program existed?

Senator, I can get you the information. I don't have it off the top of my head, but I do know every year we do do a survey for companies who receive MAP grants and we ask them those questions like how much did your company grow in revenue? How much did you grow in headcount?

And I can get that to you but it's been good, positive growth. I know that I don't have the numbers off top of my head though.

Can you send that to us when you have it?

Yes.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Okay, next up, Senate Bill 3228, relating to sustainable tourism infrastructure. First up, Chamber of Commerce. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to testify on the measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions?

3228. Yeah. DBEDT.

Okay. Like DBEDT? DBEDT. Since you pranced in so quietly.

This calls for a grant, a grant program. I guess I want to know the difference between this grant program and earlier one we just talked about, 3049.

Senator, this is not an admin bill. We didn't submit testimony. But I think a bill like this as we went through it would be helpful to the industry if they can get this one time capital infusion. But as far as the details of it, I'd have to get back to you on exactly what that would be.

Okay. But you testified in favor of the first one, the intent, right?

Yeah.

So you did the grant capability. But then this is also a grant. So I guess I'm wondering similarities, differences.

What happened was it was my understanding that HTA was gonna send testimony on this bill, not my office. But I'm here in case a question came up. I don't know all the details of it, but I will get back to you. And again, just looking at what it does, I think it would be good for the industry. It would be good for any of the businesses that would apply and get rewarded. Awarded. Sorry.

So. Okay. Because it says there is established within the Department of Business and Economic Development and Tourism. So whether HTA was going to come and testify, it is establishing it in your department. And so being said saying that, you folks have, again, the same question I asked earlier.

How much is this going to be and do you have the capability with personnel and everything to take this on? I know it's not your bill, but it is. So you know, if it does pass and go into your department, these are stuff that you're going to have to deal with, right?

Certainly if it moves to the next committee, which I'm assuming it is, we will have better, a better idea of what the amount could be, what we'd be asking to support. Because we support the intent of the bill. It's just the details that I can't give it to you right now, Senator. I'm sorry.

Okay. Well a lot of the devil is always in the details, right?

Agreed.

You know this grant program has good intentions about climate resiliency. But I think a lot of us are concerned about what the dollar figure is and where is that money coming from. Can we just take it from the Green Fee?

I mean, I know Josh, the administration has given us $120 million of recommendations, but ultimately it's up to the Legislature, not the Governor, to figure out how to spend that money. So we could potentially, if this bill moves forward and we want to fund it, use the Green Fees to fund this climate infrastructure for tourism.

That is my understanding, Senator. That the Governor will submit his list and you folks will review his list and you will, may, you may make your own list. And that is exactly that process. So yes, you're absolutely right. And as far as what the dollar amount would be, you guys have the total purse strings control and we understand that.

Director, how much you guys need to fund the sustainable tourism infrastructure matching grant program?

Okay, so you know, when you, when the Legislature passed the tax credits to do beach walk, there was a big infusion of development on that area because they got tax credits to develop the area. So you could go anywhere from $100 million to, you know, 2, 3, or 4, $5 million.

It depends on what the appetite of the Legislature is to fund. So it will go back to the question that Senator Wakai asked is, you know, at the end of the day, if you folks decide that it's going to come from the Green Fee, you know, there's $100 million a year from that. But of course, there's many, many, many other projects. So.

So the beach walk had matching funds from the state?

It was a tax credit.

It was a tax credit.

Yes. And if you remember, that whole area was in bad shape before. But the developers and the industry put money, they developed it because they could get the credit, and they did. But they also turned around a beautiful development for that beach walk. And I don't know, that was maybe 20 years ago. I forget exactly when it was. Some of you might have been here, but that's what we got for that tax credit. Okay, thank you.

Next up, Senate Bill 3270 relating to tax expenditure evaluation. First up, Director DBEDT.

We're gonna. I'm gonna stand on my testimony support and I'm here to answer any questions that you folks may have.

Thank you. Next up, Department of Taxation.

Good afternoon. Chair, Vice chair, Senator. Garrison Kurth for the Department of Taxation, stand on our own comments and here for questions.

Thank you. Next up, Tom Yamachika, Tax Foundation of Hawaii on zoom.

Thank you, Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation. We have some concerns about this Bill. It basically requires a significant population to file two tax returns, one with DBEDT and one with DOT. People who only file one tax return are going to have problems. They will go nuts.

We don't think this is necessary because the state auditor is already tasked with evaluating the credits and exemptions on either a five or seven year ruling cycle and that's provided in Chapter 23 HRS. And if it is necessary, it's. I think a.

The better way to go is to just open the information pipeline from DOTAX to DBEDT and they'll get the information and I think a more reliable manner. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Anybody wishing to testify on the measure, seeing none. Members, any questions? Senator Wakai.

So DBEDT's testimony, they said that they kind of feel uncomfortable with getting all this tax information. And your, your testimony indicates there's like some, you know, confidentiality things that we need to really be concerned about. What if we gave this responsibility to you?

I'm sure they'd love that.

Oh, okay. Go tell your boss that. Would you take this on?

I can't say we wouldn't. I would have to go back, you know, obviously talk to the Director. But I think we have all that information so you know, so not sharing it makes sense in that it gets rid of those issues that are that are raised there. So I certainly an idea we should look at then.

Okay. But I know you have been. You could collect all the data but do you have the expertise to analyze the data? So okay, is this tax credit worth value? What's, what's its value to the community? Right, all of that, all those benefits.

That's a good question too. We certainly have our tax research and planning Department but they're more in summarizing and getting to that bottom line result versus saying the bigger picture of how is it affecting the community. So I can check and get back to you on that.

Thank you.

Senator Kim.

Oh. Question, would it be more efficient if the Legislature proposed elimination of all these tax credits and exemptions and if there was insufficient support to keep them, it would be eliminated.

Would it be. I'm sorry, what was the first part? Would it be.

I said would it be more efficient, more efficient if the Legislature proposed elimination of all the tax credits.

Efficient for the state? I mean I can't say that it wouldn't be.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

DBEDT. Just trying to make your job a little easier. If the Bill passes, do you currently have the expertise and staff who can evaluate the tax records from DOTAX?

If I may bring up David Kaliho Kai, I think you've met him before, before and he's been working on a film tax credit specifically but for DBEDT and in this budget, as was talked about before, we're trying to make his position permanent Department wide under ASO and DBEDT so that all these types of things that come up, we have one person who will be overseeing all of that including energy and film tax credit and HDVC.

So we do have, I believe we have an expert that can do that if the position gets funded and he's sitting right here.

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, Members Committee. My name is David Keliiholokai. I manage the Hawaii Film Tax Credit program. So after analyzing SB3278, we believe there's a way to change this to where it's it works for DOTax. The privacy issues and with DBEDT currently we do track.

So we provide an annual report from Reed showing you guys the production, total production spend, economic impact tax credit claim. The issue is the timing of it.

So tax credit claim, the credit we give to the filers or we are awarding the filers, it's not the actual amount they're going to be receiving, it's not down to the penny because DOTax needs to review. They have their income tax return.

So the purpose of the tax credit is to offset liability at first and it's a refundable tax credit tax credit. After the fact that. So we don't know the actual amount. So we're not able to provide that. We can only provide based on the production spend for that for that year.

The issue with this is that we don't, we cannot guarantee when the review, the real review will be approved by DOTax. So for example, when we provide you the report, it's by end of year, right.

For DOTax, we don't know when they're going to be reviewing, how long it's going to take for them to review to approve of the tax credit credit. So the timing of it, I cannot set it; I put a set deadline on that.

But if we can get DOTax to provide us that information, at least the actual tax credit that they provided, we can get you the economic impact on them because we have read to do that, but we need the numbers for that, if that helps.

So, so I guess my question for DOTax is can you guys do that? Provide the numbers in a timely manner?

Well. Again a great question. You know the problem with getting to the final numbers is that people file their taxes. They may have done it wrong, they may have withheld something. So there's a whole process in trying to get the numbers to match which takes time. Also certain things get audited so that takes time.

They're under audit and that can go on and on. So it just depends on the particular. You know I'm thinking of film credit for one, things like that. So can we get numbers? Yeah, how accurate they are. It's the same kind of issue is when, when, when.

So normally when they put in for the film tax credit, you guys have had discrepancies before.

So when they apply for. Yeah, when initially applied. So we do, we do an audit but a light audit, not as heavy as DOTax. So on average we audit about 30% of their total expenditures and that's a lot.

This is thousands and thousands of line items like purchases from Walmart, McDonald's in detail for receipts we confirm to make sure that every business that they're getting with has a get or if it's or qualified for out of state.

So we do that detail work and even then there are mistakes made that we have to catch from the beginning. So we so the timing for 2025 filers, we opened it up from January 1st. They have to submit all the documentation by March 31st of this year.

We review it from April 1st and then we try to give ourselves a deadline of until July or August to complete the review our audit.

And then once it's approved by Director Tokioka or Deputy Director Dane Wicker then we submit that over to we provide the certificate letter to the filers and then from then it's up to them when they want to include include that within their income tax return. But they have until the end of the year so August.

So if we release it in August, they only have until December to submit that. So that's timing already. And then DOTax has to review it. So it's, you know, it's, it is challenging.

Thank you, Senator Favela.

Yeah, just what I guess specific criteria will debate used to determine the long standing tax credits that's no longer effective, fair or aligns with public priorities.

Can you repeat that please?

Just basically what is working and what is not working, what is the priorities.

Thank you. Georgia Skinner Creative Industries Division DBEDT the priorities are to incentivize and make sure that our local people continue to get work here. So the film credit we believe does do that also with research and development we also manage.

And so at this point in time David handling both, I would say that they are incentivizing in the correct way. But the need, as this Bill points out, for additional transparency and additional information on the economic impacts from the spend to the actual economic impacts within the state is something that we again support.

That's why we offered comments, so that we could get to a point where we could collaborate then with DOTax. Does that answer your question?

So the reason why I asked that is because again, we're doing the tax credit, which is great. You're talking about local jobs and helping the local economy. But previously, before the shortfall and the downfall of the industry, besides the tax credits, previously we had tax credits. That wasn't the case.

Again, we had shows that wasn't meeting the minimum criteria. And I brought this up before you guys and that was Temptation Island. And every year or whatever they applied for the tax credits and they was getting them, even though there was already seen and known, I guess documented that they wasn't doing that.

Majority of the guys in the beginning part of the first few seasons, maybe four or five, none of them was what the criteria was for getting a tax credit, but they still got, even though we notified you guys before Jimmy Director coming on board and they were still getting the tax credits.

The reason why I bring that up again is because we are trying to get everybody to the table and then when we go over there, we let you guys know, because I went there as a, I guess a standby, right, to see what was happening.

So every single person was a IAFC worker driving the trucks, driving the machines, everything, and nobody contact the other union, which is, I guess at the time, suppose that had been Teamsters. And when this was brought up again twice, they still got, and they still got qualified and they still got the tax credits.

So how are we going to prevent these bad actors not getting any more tax credit? Because again, we always use that word. We want to boost up the economy to help the local people, the local industry. But that's the guys who's suffering even when the tax credit was adequate, you know, so again. So again, how.

I mean, I guess I know we tried to do this Bill, but again, going forward, how are we going to ensure that again, the priorities is for our people going forward because that's the kind.

Because when they let you guys go in an email or you guys are let own in an email, and then that following year or that same year, they qualify.

So I'd like to thank you, Senator, and I do appreciate the intent of the comments that you made because in the past has been the past. And we're very proud of the way that the program is managed now under David.

However, I think that there were qualifying aspects of what they did and we normally as a Department don't get involved in any additional union negotiations. But the way that we have corrected it is to be able to additionally scrutinize and also to notify all entertainment labor unions, including the Teamsters, on when productions were coming.

In case in point was this last year, and David can speak to that. I think it was 2024 and 25 where we ensured that all of that information, that the filer, any of the productions have to agree to allow us to do that. And that was the first step in the right direction. David?

Yeah.

We'd have to talk to you offline about it.

Thank you Chair

Sure.

Thank you, Chair.

Any other question? Seeing none. Short recess.

Okay, we convening back for decision making. First up, Senate Bill 2072. After careful consideration, I think this bill needs a whole lot more work and maybe they can work on that and try to figure out Michelin Guide. Michelin pile. Maybe grips, no grips, I don't know.

But you know, hopefully we can work on that. So I will defer this bill. Next up, Senate Bill 3049, relating to Trade Oriented Production Capacity Grant Program. We will be passing with an SD 1 by making any technical, non-substantive amendments as necessary and blanking out the appropriation amount on page 5 and defecting the effective date to July 1, 2050. Members, any discussion?

Madam Chair, I think that another entity can handle this better, so I'm going to vote in opposition.

Same, Chair.

Okay. Okay. Okay. Members, with that being said, Senate Bill 3049, I'm going to defer this bill as well. Okay, moving on.

Senate Bill 3166, relating to Hawaii Technology Development Corporation. Passing with an SD 1 by making any technical, non-substantive amendments as necessary and blanking out the appropriation amounts on pages 2 and 3 and defecting the effective date to July 1, 2050. Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

I vote yes. [Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next up, Senate Bill 3167, relating to Hawaii Technology Development Corporation. Passing with an SD 1 by making any technical, non-substantive amendments as necessary and blanking out the appropriation amount on pages 6 and defecting the effective date to July 1, 2050. Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

I vote yes. [Roll Call]

Madam Chair, due to this consultant issue, I'm voting no.

[Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is not adopted.

Okay, thank you. Senate Bill 3168 relating to economic development, passing away an SD1 by making any technical non substantive amendments as necessary, blanking out the appropriation amount on pages 6 and defecting the effective date to 07-01-2050 Members any discussion? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote, Chair votes Aye.

[Roll Call]

Next up, Senate Bill 3227 relating to the Hoy Technology Development Corporation passing with an SD1 by making any technical non substantive amendments as necessary in blanking out the property appropriation amounts on pages 2 and 3 and defecting the effective date to 7-1-2050. Sorry. Members, any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote, Chair votes Aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. And the last Bill? Oh no, sorry. Next Bill. Senate Bill 3228 relating to sustainable tourism infrastructure, passing with an SD1 by making any technical nonsense of amendments as necessary and blanking out the appropriation amount on pages 6 on page 6 and defecting the effective date to 7-1-2050. Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote, Chair votes Aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. And the last Bill, Senate Bill 3278 relating to tax expenditure evaluation, passing with an SD1 by making any technical non substantive amendments as necessary. Section 3 requires DOTax to provide DBEDT with information requested by DBEDT pursuant to the new section in Chapter 201. But the new section does not have corresponding language.

Insert a new subsection in 201 dash to address this inconsistency and incorporate amendments recommended by DOTax in their testimony. Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair votes Aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you. With that, we are adjourned.

Members, we also have a 1:10 agenda for decision-making. The purpose of this decision-making is to insert substantive provisions into the following short-form Bill. A public hearing will be scheduled at a later date at which time public testimony will be accepted for Senate Bill 26 proposed SD1.

This Bill exempts the Hawaii Tourism authorities contracts or agreements for sports projects and events and marketing activities from the Hawaii Public Procurement Code and all other requirements of law for competitive bidding. Members, any questions? Seeing none. The Chair's recommendation should be to pass the Bill with amendments and recommit it back to eat Economic Development and Tourism.

The amendments are to insert the contents of the proposed Draft One. Okay with that. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair votes Aye.

[Roll Call]

Thank you, Members. With that, we are adjourned.