Senate Standing Committee on Water, Land, Culture and the Arts

Because we have so much testimony on this, and I'll say I think there's like a thousand something people who have submitted testimony, and there's probably a good chunk of those who wish to testify.

Good afternoon. We're convening the Committee on Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts on our 01:01pm agenda here in State Capitol Conference Room 224. We do have a number of measures on the agenda today. So we're going to make sure folks, if you haven't yet submit your written testimony.

We're gonna be limiting folks to one minute for your testimony to make sure there's time to get to everybody. So with that, let's go into the first measure, Senate Bill 3019 relating

Are those testimonies, like recorded and then where they like given?

We can well, we have to get through this. Everything is recorded. It'll be online.

And then like, they're like, given, like the

Sorry. If you can just

reflect on the testimony.

You're gonna have to you're gonna have to hold up there.

Council first. I'm just curious.

So on SB 3019 relating to Consumer Protection, this measure prohibits the sale of tickets at higher price than the original price charged by the primary venue ticket provider for events held in the state and permits the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs to adopt rules to impose fines for any violations. Up first testifying on this measure is the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Aloha, Chair, Vice chair, member of the committee. Emma Olson for the Office of Consumer Protection. We will stand on our written testimony in opposition. We prefer the price transparency approach in SB 2031 available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Signed up next to testify on Zoom is Rick Bartolini. Good afternoon.

Hello. Good afternoon, Chair Lee, Vice chair Inouye, and members of the committee. My name is Rick Bartolini. For sixteen years, I promoted concerts in Hawaii and brought iconic global artists to the Blaisdell Arena. SB 3019 is simple.

It prevents tickets for events in Hawaii from being resold above the original face value. Even the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs acknowledges this measure strengthens consumer protections. Opponents say it reduces choice, but resale does not create more tickets. It does not increase any capacity. It pulls tickets out of the authorized ticket provider and relists them at higher prices elsewhere.

If those tickets stayed with the authorized ticket provider, Hawaii residents would have more choices at face value. Opponents also claim this will push buyers to the dark web, but approximately 85% of resale happens on major platforms like StubHub, SeatGeek, Vivid Seats, and Ticketmaster Resale Exchange. Regulating those dominant platforms addresses the vast majority of activity. This bill does not ban resale or transfers. It simply protects the original face value. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Testifying next is the National Independent Venue Association.

Chair, Vice chair, and members of the committee, my name is Kendall Gilvar on behalf of the National Independent Venue Association and the Fix the Tix Coalition, which is working on similar measures nationwide in strong support of SB 3019.

NIVA represents thousands of independent venues, festivals, and performing arts organizations meeting nationwide, including in Hawaii. Our coalition unites venues, artists, arts groups, and independent ticketing companies, all united calling for retail price caps.

Resale price caps reduce the incentive for extreme markups, bots, and fake tickets that dominate today's secondary ticketing market in Hawaii. They also send a clear message that Hawaii will not be an easy target for professional scalpers.

You will hear opposition from marketplaces, that dominate resale calling for a lack of resale price caps, but that market generates hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for price gouging your constituents and consumers.

States across the country, almost a dozen now are, enacting and working on these resale price caps, both red and blue, and we work, we offer our advocacy resources to advise and work with your, office on pushing forward the resale price cap bill. Thank you.

Summarize. Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify, in person or online on this measure. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in Senate bill 3019?

That being said, are there any questions?

Real quick for DCCA.

Thanks. Going through your testimony here. You come out in opposition and then cited ticket transparency. What's the difference between I guess in, as you as you explain it here, what's the difference between ticket transparency and ticket scalping?

Ticket transparency requires all of the fees to be included in the price that you see upfront. So you're not skipping through all the screens, and then when you go to check out, your price increases by like, $30 because of fees that aren't disclosed. And then ticket scalping is the resale of tickets from the original vendors by a third party.

So how does, so I'm familiar with the ticket transparency measures. I introduced that last year.

Yes.

We moved it. But how does that stop scalping?

I guess it's a consumer protection approach that's different from scalping. We're more looking at price transparency altogether rather than the secondary market. I think enforcement might be a little bit difficult for our office if there's a total ban on scalping, but that's something that I could look into and get back to you.

So your testimony is not about ticket scalping then?

And the impacts of that?

Right.

No. It's about hidden fees in live ticket event sales, which, so it's kind of a

That's a different bill.

A different, yes. We're saying that we support that bill instead of the scalping ban.

Is scalping not an issue for you guys?

Our office does receive some complaints, but we can't take enforcement on scalping issues.

Why is that?

Because a lot of these scalpers are not in state, and it's difficult for us to have jurisdiction over those resellers.

So it's not a problem in your eyes?

I think that it's a problem that could be approached. I'll have to get back to you on that and talk to my office.

Because your testimony is very strong here. Not only are you opposed, you're saying hold the measure, which is I've never seen, I think from a department like yours.

Yes. I think that our department's approach is that we're really set on the fee transparency and aligning with the FTC rule on hidden fees so that enforcement will be straightforward if we have a state counterpart to that rule.

So that's a bigger issue then?

I believe the department sees that as a bigger issue.

Let me just ask and I was just talking to the folks at the Honolulu Symphony. They're posting an upcoming concert with Joe Hisaishi, which is kind of exciting. Tickets sold out, you know, like that. Right now, they're online on resale websites for as much as $1,900.

Oh my gosh.

Is that surprising?

That's pretty striking. Yes.

That's for the Honolulu Symphony.

Right. Yeah. I completely understand and know that this is an issue. I can come back and do some more talking with the department and see if there's any changes to our position.

It would seem to be beyond just a high number, an issue of well, a whole bunch of issues as it relates to protecting consumers here because as you had mentioned, a lot of those folks are out of state so that money tends to go out of state.

Yes.

So in the case of a $1,900 Honolulu Symphony ticket or do you have any idea how much they're actually collecting? The symphony is actually collecting?

That's I don't know.

It's just over $10.

Oh my goodness. Yeah.

Which means almost $1,900 is going out of state in order for people here to see something that the folks who are reselling the tickets never had a chance or never had an intent to see?

Yeah. That's a problem.

So perhaps you'd like to go back and maybe rethink the testimony?

Yes.

Is that, is that

I can do that.

Okay.

Vice chair.

Then to add, to continue the discussion. So you're saying that if you're opposing the measure, but we're saying that you should the department should follow-up if this measure passes becomes law, you're imposing, and you're working on rules.

So are you saying beforehand right now that, we're, you're predicting that hopefully the bill dies, But if this passes, are you saying as well taking a position that you're not going to follow through to adopt rules?

We are not taking that position. I think if this measure moves forward, then we would certainly work on our enforcement, but we're not taking a position.

And I agree to the chair and the, and the bill before us today that, yeah, it's just unbelievable that our own people here in our state would pay a lot more to see, and to participate in a venue. But it's getting out of hand and it's no different than symphonies. We can talk about football games or whatever is happening in our state. And I think DCCA should be able to enforce these rules because it has been going on for many years.

We all know that, as well, but, okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Further questions?

If not, just one more for you there. I'll just note your testimony in this exact same measure last year was different. It was a different position. Did something change on your end?

Not to my knowledge. I'm not sure. I believe we took comments last year. Yeah. I can get back to you.

I'm not sure.

Actually, just note, a few years before the prior OCP Director, before this one, treated this as a pretty critical issue of importance.

Yeah. I can't speak to that. It wasn't with the department at the time.

Okay. Well, maybe we what we can do is we can follow-up offline.

Okay. Sounds good.

And this goes to another committee as well too. So I think, you know, it's best that, you know, we just move the measure along and take it from there.

Yeah. And I'll just go real quick online to, I guess, both of those who are online for the National Independent Venue Association first. Is, I was curious from national front, what are other states doing right now on this, and what does that enforcement look like?

Sure. Yeah. This is not a controversial issue. The only people who are opposing resale price cap bills, as you'll see from the comments submitted, are organizations like SeatGeek and StubHub who have billions of dollars to gain from price gouging your constituents. And therefore, a number of states across the country are moving resale price caps specifically in the 2025-2026 session.

It's almost a dozen at this point, Delaware, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Washington State, Washington DC, Wisconsin, Maryland, West Virginia, Kansas, Vermont. And I know that there are others coming up in this state legislature.

Enforcement is, you know, being sorted out by a number of venues and arts colleagues across the country, but it's absolutely possible. And we would encourage the legislature to regulate out of state actors that are duping Hawaiians, and it's very, very possible.

And it's actively happening right now, And we've actually received buy in from a number of Attorney General's Offices, in helping us enforce this bill.

Thank you. And let me go real quick to Mister Bartolini, if you're still with us.

Hello.

Thanks. Well, I guess from your position in the industry here in Hawaii, to what extent has this been an issue lately?

Well, I think we had a we had a ticket buyer that submitted testimony for Josh Groban. He, the original ticket price was $70.50, and he paid $250. And those were like nosebleeds at the Blaisdell Arena.

And then in in 2014 for Carrie Underwood, The tickets were $695, and four and the consumer paid for four tickets $9,000.

Wow

And I just like to follow-up with the the DCC person. The Transparency Act is already law, and and Ticketmaster and SeatGeek and StubHub are all following that law. You know? When you click on the ticket, you get the actual price of the ticket with the fees.

Thank you.

That's not an issue.

I sure would like to know how much you paid for Super Bowl.

Yeah. Okay. Are there any further questions?

Seeing none.

Thank you everybody for your time. Let's move on to the next measure.

Up next is Senate Bill 3311 relating to the Strengthen Hawaii Homes Program, which establishes, the program under the Department of Land Natural Resources to award grants for qualified mitigation projects to mitigate against loss from fire and provides eligibility criteria for residential property owners to receive grants and guidelines for contractors and assessors to perform work on mitigation projects.

Up next is Senate Bill 3311, relating to the strengthen Hawaii homes program which establishes the program under the Department of Land Natural Resources to award grants for qualified mitigation projects to mitigate against loss from fire and provides eligibility criteria for residential property owners to receive grants and guidelines for contractors and assessors to perform work on mitigation projects. Testifying first on 3311 is DLNR Good afternoon.

Testifying first on 3311 is DLNR.

Good afternoon.

Aloha and [Foreign Language]. Chair Lee, Vice Chair Inouye, and members of the committee. My name is Michael Walker. I serve as the Statewide Fire Protection Forester for the Department of Land and Natural Resources Division of Forestry and Wildlife. The department has submitted testimony and supported this measure.

In summary, the need for the program is now. The program is modeled on other programs that have been used successfully on in states on the continent. It's based on research performed by Headwaters Economics, which has been incorporated into the Kauai County wildland urban interface code for plantation villages to reduce ignitions by ember showers. The department is supportive of creating the program within the department for now, but ultimately, we see this program really lying within the office of the state fire marshal.

However, since the Fire Marshal's Office is an office of one right now, we accept to begin the program and then transfer when capacity is met there.

Mahalo.

Thank you. Testifying next is DCCA.

Afternoon Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee, Matt Tsujimura, on behalf of the Insurance Division. You have our written testimony, so the insurance division will stand on its written comments, but happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you.

As everyone who had signed up to testify in SB 3311, is that anyone else wishing to testify in this measure? Seeing none other questions. Okay. Seeing none. Thank you, everyone.

Let's move on to the next measure, SB 2979 relating to Community Co-management Agreements, which authorizes DLNR and community based organizations to enter into community cO-management agreements concerning state lands. Makes other amendments.

Testifying first is DLNR.

[Inaudible]

Thank you. Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

Good afternoon. We stand on our testimony and strong support. Mahalo

Thank you.

Kua‘āina Ulu ʻAuamo.

Aloha, Kevin Chang from Kua‘āina Ulu ʻAuamo. We stand on our testimony [inaudible]

Thank you. Mālama Pūpūkea-Waimea

Aloha. Good afternoon, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. On behalf of Mālama Pūpūkea-Waimea from the North Shore Of Oahu, we're in strong support. And I just wanna echo Kevin's comments about KUA's amendments being, common sense ways to keep this bill moving forward. Mahalo. And it's just a pleasure to have such strong collaboration between DLNR and the communities on this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hui Maka’āinana o Makana.

Aloha, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Chipper Wickman, Vice president of the Hui Makai Nanao Makana. First off, Chair, thank you for personally introducing this bill. This is super important to our community. The Hui has been at the point of this, but this is now statewide Piaena effort. And it's it's really, really important.

The one point I'd like to say is when this our companion bill was heard in the house, there was confusion over this 65 year limit for state leases. That's not a mandate that co-management agreements are 65 years. The department has complete authority on the length of that period of time.

So I just wanna clarify that, that deal it's up to DLNR as they work with each of our nonprofits what is the appropriate term of a co-management agreement. So somehow there was confusion on the on the house bill around that.

And we do support, strongly support, not only KUA's requested amendments, but the amendments requested by DLNR. We've been working closely in our co-management working group for for six months on this. So thank you.

Thank you. Up next, Ko`olau Foundation .

Good afternoon. I also stand on strength in strong support of the written testimony, and came up here because I wanted to say hello to you. Mahalo.

Good afternoon.

Mahalo. Discuss this out with the amendments, suggested by court.

And testifying next is Moana Ohana.

I'll make it simple. I stand on my testimony and, a strong support of this co management bill as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Nature Conservancy.

Nature Conservacy, stands on its written testimony and strong support and also [inaudible]. Thank you.

Thank you. Ko`olaupoko Hawaiian Civic Club.

Aloha mai kakou, Chair, Co chair, Members of the committee. I speak of strong support of this bill. This is a fact. I think, the DLNR is trying to fix some of the mistakes they did in the past, like the leasing of the Heia State Park. Would they be still to an outside venue from the State of Virginia that doesn't even vote in the State of Hawaii? And it should be kept within our own community in the State of Hawaii. Mahalo.

Mahalo.

Mahalo.

Sierra Club of Hawaiʻi.

Sierra Club of Hawaiʻi, stand on its testimony.

Thank you.

Hui Maka‘ainana o Makana William Kinney on Zoom.

Alright. Here. Call my name is on here as as Billy Williams. Same thing. Aloha mai ka kou, chair, vice chair, committee members.

Billy Kinney, I am the currently the Assistant Director of the Hui Maka‘ainana o Makana. I stand on my written testimony on behalf of the Hui. We strongly support SB 2979 with the amendments proposed by KUA and DLNR. But I would only add, as Uncle Chipper said, that this is not just a movement in pockets around Hawaii, like little places here and there.

This is kind of a statewide thing that is now gonna proliferate all over as, you folks continue to hear this bill and these measures around community co management.

And then I would finally just add one last thing that even Don Chang, Former Chair of BLNR, she was often noted as saying that there is success in the relationships built through shared Kuleana or responsibility as those that were created curated in between the Hui and state parks. And former chair even said, former chair even said that she had a pathway forward and that was co-management. So, mahalo.

Thank you. Testifying next is Hui Aloha Kiholo on Zoom.

Aloha mai kaku. My name is Kekoa Alip. I am with Hui Aloha Kiholo. He is calling from a big island. I am in strong support of this bill. I believe that there's proven results already from coal management entities such as those like ourselves.

I believe it's collaborative with the community to allow this bill to pass. And I also think that it could provide some really critical jobs in a species that we do educational algorithms in a community. I think letting them know that there are entities like this that they are able to take part in.

So job security is also one of those things that really come to mind. So, Mahalo for your time and allowing me to strip my voice for this testimony. Strong support. Aloha.

Testifying next is Chad Wiggins.

Good afternoon. Yeah. Aloha mai kakou. My name is Chad Wiggins. I reside in Waimea, Lalamilo, South Kohala Hema, Moku o Keawe.

Good afternoon.

I'm in strong support of this bill with the amendments co recommended. I have about 20 years experience co developing community driven management plans in Hawaii. And over that course of time, looking into co-management, I've learned a lot about humility. Our community knows more than any person, no matter how educated, and involving community in decision making is the path forward.

Community has a Kuleana, which is a responsibility and a privilege to take care of a place and a right to take care of a place, it puts a lot of accountability on their shoulders.

When the authority exists outside the accountability, we get a lot of tension and conflict. So I think this is a step to reunite authority and accountability. My only recommendation is to spell out the co in co-management. What does that co mean? Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uilani Naipo.

Speaks in ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi

Marine advocate for place based governance. Strong support is submitted my testimony and stand on it. I just wanted to highlight that I am one of the organizations in the 15 active ones in West Hawaii that would benefit from this. Many of us are informal, and we're informal because we don't have such an agreement that will solidify our partnerships with the agencies. So please, pass this. Thank you very much.

Thank you. And on Zoom, Joell Edwards.

Not present on Zoom, Chair

Okay. That is everyone who had signed up to testify in this measure. Is there anyone else wishing to testify?

Please come forward.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Hello. Good afternoon.

Chair, vice chair, committee members. My name is Barbara Quinby. I'm a resident of Kailua. I submitted written testimony late, and I do stand on that testimony in support of this measure, as well as the amendments proposed by KUA.

Thank you. Anybody else?

Seeing none, are there any questions?

Aloha. Online, we have, people that wanna testify as well.

Sorry. Have you signed up to testify online?

No. But as I'm waiting for as as I'm waiting for the other items, I wanted to

Yeah. You know, to be clear, we have to be fair to everybody who took the time to sign up because there's not gonna be enough time to get to everyone. So appreciate your comments. But we'll

Yeah.

Have your written testimony for the time being quickly.

But really quicklyu, one last thing.

IT, could you please

No. I don't

Thank you. I apologize, everyone. We have to be fair here. There's not enough time to get to everybody. If you took the time to sign up or even show up, you know, we try to make sure everybody has that opportunity.

So that said, are there any questions on 2979?

No.

Okay. Seeing none. Let's move on to the next measure, SB 2351, relating to the State Park Special Fund, which authorizes the Department of Land and Natural Resources to expend the monies from the State Park Special Fund for programs aimed at environmental protection.

Testifying first is the Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Chair, vice chair. Alan Carpenter.

Good afternoon.

Administrative for State Parks will stand on our written testimony in opposition.

Thank you. Thank you. Next is, on Zoom, Tax Foundation.

Aloha and good afternoon. Colleen Teramai on behalf of Tanya Machica. I'm also driving, so that's why there's no video. The Tax Foundation stands on its written testimony. Mahalo.

Thank you.

Was she oppose or support?

Comments. Uilani Naipo

Uilani Naipo in strong support. So then my best.

Thank you. And on Zoom, Kurt Cottrell.

Not present on Zoom, chair.

Okay. That's everyone who had signed up to testify in SB 2351. Is there anyone else here wishing to testify? Let's move forward.

I'll be very quick, chair and vice chair. Chipper Wickman, Hyena resident. We've been working with state parks for over twenty years in the Hyena State Park, which is one of the parks generating revenue that's going into the special fund. I believe it's critical that that money remain in the special fund for use in other parks that cannot generate that kind of revenue.

Once we dilute that by siphoning that off, even for well meaning projects outside of parks, it's gonna diminish that special fund and the ability of parks to support it. Kirk Cottrell had some excellent testimony, so I support everything he said.

So so you're in opposition?

I'm in opposition. Sorry. I did get my name, but maybe it was Lee.

Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. We have that here.

Okay.

Thank you. Alright. Are there any questions? Just for state parks. You come up for a second. Thanks. The intent here, obviously, is to make, I think, best use of resources.

For your testimony, you'd noted, obviously, there's been a more recent infusion of cash into the State Park Special Fund. How how much of that is basically programmed or planned to be used?

All of it. And, so we are working on several initiatives. Mainly, we're trying to work on a preferred contractor contract, which allows to more efficiently return money for heavy R and M, which is something that we've relied on CIP funds for in the past, which meant that it took forever. And, they were very intermittent.

They weren't regular maintenance. We have an incredibly aging state park system. As I like to say, the state park system and myself are about the same age. Neither of us is aging very gracefully, and we need to we can't just make things pretty on the surface, which is, you know, those are the splashy projects. But every time we turn around, we're finding something that's broken under the ground.

And most recently, we had to turn off our bathrooms at Sand Island State Recreation Area because of electrical blowouts. We're just building our first compliant ADA campsite at Kei Vaheyao State Recreation Area of Mauka. And I don't know if we're gonna be able to open it because the water line burst under the surface because it's 50 years old. Right? So every time we turn around, we're finding another infrastructure issue.

I can see a future where we could give some of this money back for for well meaning projects. Until we bring our parks up to the standards of our resources, we need this money, and we need to we need to reinvest it.

Thanks. How much right now of that special fund is, I don't have right in front of me, but is it 30 some some odd million dollars?

Yeah. So we I think we have 30 if we hit our target this year, and there's always little glitches with procurement and things like that, we'll send a we'll spend around 33,000,000, which is literally all of our ceiling. And just for your information, that ceiling is artificially inflated so we can reinvest because we weren't able to spend all our money since we started invest accruing it.

So if we spend that, our special fund will be going down because we're only we're generating 25,000,000 in revenue for the $33,000,000 special funds here.

Okay. Thank you.

I have a question for you

Vice chair.

Or or a comment, actually. The governor has floated this green fee project of his. And I'm just curious if state parks was one of those that are trying to get some of those funds back into your agency. But with your your special fund, you should be able to address a lot of the issues you did. And actually, it's more like a shortfall because there's so many projects statewide that you need to address.

You didn't participate in that green fee ask.

So great question. We, the green fee, I think we we had modest asks, things that we wouldn't normally do. And they included, like, fire mitigation plans statewide, which is an emerging issue, as well as conversion of cesspools, which is an environmental issue for our recreational cabins up in. But our our ask was very minimal, deferring to the other divisions in the agency who don't have the kind of robust funds that we have ourselves.

Okay. Alright. Thank you. Keep up the good work you you folks have been doing statewide. We appreciate it.

Thank you for your support.

Any further questions? Seeing none. Alright. Thank you. Let's move on to the next measure.

SB 2918 relating to the Hawaii Community Development Authority, which requires HCDA to establish a community action center in Chinatown. Testifying first on2918 is HCDA. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, members of member of the committee. Craig Nakamoto, executive director for Hawaii Community Development Authority. In the time that I have a charter be brief and hit the high point.

So I appreciate the idea in this bill and thinking about HCV for carrying out and the confidence that you have an HCD for doing it, and for all the supporters that believe it have confidence in HCD to carry out this I would say, though, that my comments really focus around really jurisdiction and geography. And just because you we can doesn't mean we should.

Jurisdiction here, I think, is, is in city jurisdiction. I think the city is deeply invested in Chinatown, and I think they should continue their work.

I can't hear you.

So I the I'll go over it.

So I'll make two or three comments. One, it's about jurisdiction and geography. And just because you can doesn't mean you should. So, jurisdiction and geography, the city and county of Honolulu is deeply invested in this area, and I think they should continue to do that work. And just because we can doesn't mean we should.

Act 252, as you know, chair, vice chair, allows us to do work in other jurisdictions. But I think when you look at all the work that we have to do, I think there's other things that I feel we should focus on that have higher value, like doing the infrastructure and roads at West Oahu, doing Iveoli Kapalama, you know, electrical work in Saratoga. Yeah. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next, Governor Abercrombie. Excuse me.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senators, thank you for the opportunity. Mister Chairman, I had not anticipated that the HCDA would, would take this position. Our, our situation here in Honolulu is expanding. Part of the reason we're here advocating for this, I I work in Chinatown.

I've been there ever since I left the governorship. I've built apartments in Chinatown, permanent rentals in Chinatown. We're, we're growing right now to build an unused commercial space to put in housing, permanent rental housing for the houseless people. Of course, the city is working with us on this. This is exactly what I wanted the HCDA to be doing when we we when I when it was established and when I when I was governor.

You wanna talk about geography? HCDA right now is talking to the university about doing housing out at West Oahu College. If what what jurisdiction is that if if it's not a Chinatown? I commend this these committees for for for seeing how important this is. Just a couple of more points.

Chinatown is is less than a ten minute walk from the cruise ships coming in here right now. This is a state issue. This is they could the HCA HCDA is uniquely qualified to do. If if if maybe we need some changes in the HCDA to get people who are looking for work to do, looking to see how they can coordinate with the modern twenty-first century city. Chinatown needs precisely this kind of community center.

And I will tell you, the people in Chinatown, the small businesses, the people who live there, the people who work there like I do, the people who are committed to Chinatown will work with the HCDA to see that this is done. You should be grabbing this opportunity.

I'd ask you to summarize, governor.

That's pretty much my summary.

I have, I have some. Can I.

Thank you.

Can I disagree with you much as I love you, governor?

It won't be the first time, senator. Thank you.

I, I know. I know.

But I disagree with you, on on with regards to your statement, with the comments that HCDA had provided because HCDA is under the state's kuleana.

Now I live in Chinatown, okay, in my home away from home, being a big islander. And I understand, and I'm really happy that Mayor Glen Giardi is taking over and making sure the statements are correct, that Taiwan should be involved with making sure that they take care of their own building, that I love to go eat dim sum there.

Yes.

However though, I disagree with the comments that you made because I need HCDA to complete our work that we have been waiting for over twenty years to redevelop Banyan Drive, so our people here can have their rooms back at reasonable prices to go to Hilo and visit. So we have a big project we're working on with on getting Banyan Drive going and making sure it brings back to where I worked for 21 years back into the shape, and we need HCDH.

Absolutely

However, though, this is, and I'm happy, your mayor, and as for as myself as being a former mayor as well, has done a really good job cleaning up. And I commend you. You have been involved with it, getting rid of the homeless and straightening out, Chinatown. And Chinatown should be a Chinatown that we all visit out in our other states as well.

But, you know, good luck to you. But this is one governor I did tell you I love you, but I'm gonna object to your position. But we'll help, and I'll go back and and have my dinners in Chinatown.

Sure.

We're not actually.

May I respond just very briefly?

Well, it depends on my chair.

Senator, we're we are not in disagreement. Quite quite the opposite. When I mentioned about the geography is this is precisely what I'm saying, whether it's Kapolei, whether it's West Oahu, whether it's Banditry, if the HCDA has been assigned to it, it's been assigned to it because of the unique capacity that HCDA to has to get through procurement, to get through zoning.

I do.

And I'm glad you recognize that.

That's why we continue to make sure that HCDA survives to doing projects on government lands.

Yes.

As well and on government features that we need to make sure our communities throughout the state are well addressed in good good development plans.

As you know, the Big Island and particularly in your jurisdiction never had a stronger supporter than yours truly. So I know. What I'm saying is is HCDA is is uniquely it was uniquely organized. I was there in 1974 and '5 when HCDA came into existence. So I'm, I'm quite familiar with the reasons why and how it's supposed to work, and it's uniquely equipped.

Now if, if they say there are other things to be done, of course, there are other things to be done. Part of the reason that we're here, Mister Chairman, is very important. His heart now is is is in in Chinatown. That's why the community center as, as outlined here really needs to be done. I'm not saying instead of other things.

I'm saying this is an addition that whose time has come, and that's the reason that we're here.

And I'm glad you're working hard for Chinatown. Good luck.

You know me, I won't, I won't quit.

Okay. Bye, Governor. Okay.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Real quick for HCDA. Thank you. Thanks. We heard the governor, I think, and some of the other comments.

In your mind, is HCDA doing everything it's supposed to be doing, or are you limited or constrained by resources, or what's the situation?

So, you know, people at the legislature legislature legislators who know me, I think I can honestly say that, when a project is is is asked of me, I'm more likely to say yes, can do, more than no can do. But I also in the in the constraints that we have as an agency just in terms of the various projects, I also have to be discriminated about what projects we do. So what Governor Abercrombie mentions is UH West Oahu.

That is part of our statutory mandate for TLD, and that's critically important for that area. Even a Kapalama is also important.

Kalailua, we're also trying to do we also have a project in Central Maui, Palihunui, where we try to do infrastructure for the state lands there. So if if there's another government agents in and for those projects, I think we're uniquely capable for to do it, and we're the ones that are gonna do it. But in this instance where the city is already doing work here in Chinatown, has done work, and will continue to do it to improve it.

Mayor Blangiardi, I believe, is committed to do it as well as the city. So if there's somebody else to do it, and they're already invested in it, I would suggest I would suggest that they they continue doing it with help from the legislature directly is is by suggestion.

One of the things that ,and I haven't talked to the author of the bill about specific intent beyond, it's a bill for Chinatown to do community center. What's contemplating this measure goes beyond, I think, traditionally, what the city has done in some cases. If I'm if I'm reading things right, It's not just a physical space, but it is actual build-out and programmatic community engagement and all those sorts of things. Is that how you read this?

I do, but I disagree that the the city is is not capable of doing it. I think they're capable of doing it. One of the tasks in here is to work with heart on the redesign of a station that's totally within the city's jurisdiction. Working on a strategic plan for economic vitalization. I don't think that's anything new to the city, seeking additional state funding to develop areas.

I think this city is well equipped to do it as far as procuring. I mean, I think they can procure as well and as probably as fast as we can. So I, I disagree with the that notion, Chair. I think that there's things in here that they can do just as well as we can.

I agree that you can say it's capable, but, you know, it's I've been here for 40 some odd years, and things are pretty well the same for the most part. I'm not faulting anybody who's come before or is here now.

Here. Here.

But overall, if you look to other places, I think there are some clear examples of agencies in other cities that have been able to radically transform different communities with a little bit of will and a little bit of collaboration, even if it means moving beyond their status quo. I raised this because one of the testifiers interestingly on this measure is the former director of HCDA who testified that this is a good thing that's worthy of action.

So just to note, Mr. Varell was a former direct executive director of the Hawaii Community Development Authority, back in the think early or late two thousands. And interesting to note he's also a board member of SHADE. You know, I spoke to the principal member of SHADE, Mr Sakamoto about this and express the same views I have in this bill. So I acknowledge Mr. Daniel, Daniel's testimony, but I still maintain the same comments I have.

Thank you.

And just to add, you know.

Sorry. Just real quick. So you're essentially saying find another, another agency?

I'm not saying find another agency. I'm saying this. The city is already working in Chinatown to revitalize it. That's that's my testimony, Chair. Is the city is well invested in Chinatown?

I believe it has the support of the mayor and given that there's an agency to do it. It's not like there's no other agency to do it. You know, unlike maybe on Valiant Drive, where I think we're really the only state agency that can plan master plan and develop Banyan Drive. I think this one there is another alternative, and the alternative is the city and county there there already.

Well, just to add too, the city and county is gaining on this because they collect the real property taxes. And everyone who's there with their lands they pay the city tons of money. And I think, correctly, I supported HCDA's viewpoint.

Yeah. Okay. And, and, Chair, I just wanna make one last comment is, you know, I'm not I'm not one to run away from work, you know, as, you know, someone might suggest, but I I'm willing to do a lot of things, and I'm willing. Like I said, I'm more of a yes can do that. I know can do, but I do have to be discriminated about the projects we do.

Then look at the relative value of it versus other things we're doing, and that's really the balance that I'm trying to sort of express in this testimony. Maybe not artfully, but this is what I'm trying to say.

But I acknowledge the intent of this and the, you know, the good intentions behind this bill.

It seems we can we can follow-up on other conversations. It just strikes me that this is, I think, two years of conversations over various projects and programs and capacity to put into HCDA. And it is somewhat frustrating that there's been, I think, to your point, say, yes. We can if, but it's been at every corner, at least in our conversations, no. And, you know, each project has its own merits and its own situation.

But the capacity that we've offered each CDA, not only in the bill last year that gives you new financing tools and other things and offered additional resources for staffing, which you declined. Now puts us in this position where you're saying you have to pick and choose.

And so a question that comes to us on the legislative side, at least in my time here, has been responsibility for us to weigh in and not ultimately let departments make those decisions if they feel resource-constrained and have to choose between projects, but rather have that partnership between the legislature and the departments to collectively choose which projects go forward. So I know you guys are here for a number of other projects, not only banging drive, but, other things.

I mean, do we then, and this is just kinda rhetorical, have to ask, alright, what should we enable you to do, and what should we not?

So we can follow-up offline, but appreciate the conversation.

Senator, let me, let me just respond to one thing, if you don't mind, if I may. So under Act 252, we you and I worked very closely on that kind of intensely at times to get to a finish on that to 52 and we did that gives us more power. On the question of staffing at at that present time when that 252 was going through.

I wasn't sure what kind of staffing I needed because I wasn't sure what kind of projects we would be getting. And, you know, just out of steward you know, careful stewardship of state resources, I'm kinda low to ask for staffing until I know what my needs are.

As to that funding mechanism in act two five two, if you're talking about the 180 million dollar bond ceiling cap that was really earmarked for the the stadium development, and and other bond authority. I think you're aware, and I don't have to say this. I hope I don't have to repeat this, but a bond issuance comes with the repayment obligation. As soon as bonds the first bond is issued, the first dollar

Director let me stop you there just because we're short on time. We can continue the conversation online.

Just getting bond issuance doesn't mean we have money.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Further questions on that?

If, if sorry. We're in question and answer. We have a lot of testimony. There was a time to testify.

Yea but I wanted to say something that she said stated that the city is giving you money to make these city is giving you money to make these partners. 19,000.

Let me let me let me stop you. We appreciate you guys being here.

There's a. There's an order to be respectful to everybody's time. We're not gonna be able to get through everything.

So let's move on to the next measure.

How is that how is that SB3029 the bar forces to take away from the food and everything relating to community

development. Speak to the last

You know, given the situation here, and we're running short on time

indicated in his testimony, I'd like to respond. Yeah.

I think that's the one.

If if one of the members would like to ask you a question

No. Okay. I'm getting a little bit more background on the bill if you wanna know.

We can we'll we'll follow-up afterward for with everybody. So, guys, guys, we're we're not we're not gonna turn this into a discussion. I I understand it can be frustrating at times. We have a limited window of time to get through bills that a lot of people have come just as far for.

So when there's an opportunity to testify in a bill if you signed up, we really wanna make sure everybody has that chance and and make sure that we have an opportunity to get through some of these things.

And just to add I'm sorry. I'm sorry, ma'am. Just to add, if these bills doesn't make it till the end of the agenda, some of these bills are gonna die because this is the week that we need to make sure all of the committee bills are back into its sync. And otherwise Okay. Let's we don't have time.

This committee is targeted to adjourn at about 02:30 or whatever, but

Let's move on. Let's move on.

We don't have time.

Sorry. To SB3029 relating to community development, which requires in each county collaboration with Hawaii Community Development Authority to establish a summer streets pilot program that closes vehicular traffic and repurposes roads for pedestrian and cyclist use, outdoor events, and other community driven activities. Testifying first on 3029 is the Department of Health. You guys thought I was gonna say HCDA, didn't you? Okay.

Up next, HCDA.

So Chair, Vice Chair, can you just apply and the prime deadline?

Thank you. Thank you. Up next on Zoom is the Hawaii Public Health Institute. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, and Members of the Committee. My name is Patty Haziz Devrakis, and I am the active transportation specialist with Hawaii Public Health Institute. The Hawaii Public Health Institute, in conjunction with the Healthy Eating and Act of Living Statewide Coalition support this measure and stand on our comments. We ask that you pass this measure, and I thank you very much for your time and for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Next is Eduardo Hernandez. I believe HBL. If not, on Zoom, Tara Rojas.

Aloha, Tara Rojas.

Good afternoon.

Aloha. Our our concerns about access, equity, unintended consequences, and meaningful community participation. Closing or repurposing streets, even though it sounds really great, even temporary temporary

Tara, can you turn your camera on, please?

What? Let me just finish. Can directly impact local residents, workers, people with disabilities, and families who rely on vehicles.

Miss Rojas

They include

You've testified here several days now.

Can I just finish?

Could you please turn your camera on? It's it's part of the

That's it.

Also rules that we have in place to make sure everybody significant. IT, can you please mute her?

Okay.

Guys, I just wanna be clear.

Okay.

A lot of folks go out of their way to take the time to come down here and show up as you know. A lot of folks can't make it and are online, but we try to be fair to everybody, make sure everybody has that opportunity on whatever that issue is that's important to them. I wish we had more time to give everyone as much opportunity as they wanted to save from the top of their lungs.

Have time in life.

Like Wait. So may, May I

So

May I, I have

We're gonna ask everyone to abide by the rules. It again.

I, I'm trying to finish my one minute for 3029.

Okay. I I have I'm sorry. Thank you. Miss Rojas, your video is now on. You're welcome to finish your testimony.

Can you take the next thirty seconds?

Or my wife.

Let's proceed.

Wait. No. I have a minute. I, I raised

This is this is the Senate rules.

Meaningful community participation, even temporarily, closing or repurposing streets can access can impact local residents, workers, Kupuna, people with disabilities, and family who rely on vehicle access. The inclusion of HCD also raises significant concern. They have they hold broad development authority, you just heard, and a track record of centralized decision making that does not always reflect direct community input, community participation, or cultural accountability. Public spaces should not be placed in frameworks that increase centralized control without clear safeguards, transparency, and community participation.

Also, so called temporary pilot programs also become permanent.

Miss Rojas, I'm gonna ask you to summarize that.

A pathway for expansion through reporting. So I'm gonna summarize that that's my testimony. And just for for sticking to format and not listening to community voices just to to get things through, that that is super heva. We're we're taking our time on. Even though we're here in person or online, you should respect and not just because we're not signed up because there's 2,000 to 5,000 people that we have to be watching at

Okay. That is SB3029. Are there any questions on this measure from anybody? Seeing none. Thank you, everyone.

Let's move on to the next measure, SB3148, which excuse me, relating to the use of public lands, which defines public uses of lands as uses by an agency either directly or through disposition. I'll just note we have let's see. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 more bills. Seven bills roughly on the agenda today.

I'm gonna note for the audience because this is one of those measures that has a ton of input and testimony, which we appreciate from everybody, that we're gonna be deferring this measure because of a whole bunch of issues it has.

So I'm gonna say that on the outset so that folks are aware. We're gonna certainly make an opportunity for folks to say something if they like. But if we take too much time in this measure, we're not gonna get to the others. And since almost universally the testimony is in opposition to this one, I'd ask folks to consider standing on your testimony if you so choose. So with that, on three one four eight, is there first of all, let me do a quick poll.

Is there anyone in the room who still wishes to testify in 03/01/1948? Come forward.

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, the service of DLNR chair's office. I just wanted to note that we do not object

to this deferral. If that saves anybody any time, then thank you. Okay.

Thank you. Anybody else? Please come forward, sir. Good afternoon.

Hello, everybody. Hello.

Aloha.

My name is Willie Taylor Robello, and I stand in strong opposition of this field like everybody else. I just please I wish to have it for future generations. I'm sorry. And my sons and everybody else's sons here. For me, color, race, creed, where you come from, no matter.

But these beaches, these lands where I grew up on and played, I feel should be free in the Canada for everybody. It shouldn't be any way.

I'm sorry.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. K.

Is there anyone else on this measure? And again, I'll note we're deferring the measure, which means it's not moving forward. Thank you.

Thank you.

Me as well. Sonorek.

I think we could be creative

with how we use other plans and not always think that they have to

be for research or resource or housing to, like, really think about where

are your, like, houses just congregated and think, like, they're doing drugs, so they're, like, tapped into

If you're gonna if you're gonna continue on, would you like to

So I come forward?

Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, cool.

Yay. Oh, what a blessing. I felt so honored. Thank you so much. Thank you for

Your time limited to

I know. I appreciate that. I understand that. I will not ramble, even though I'm very grateful. So I have actively chosen to be houses because I have felt that, like, the, like, island and the land, like, needs more people to actually be, like, grounded in.

And what I have noticed in life is that when there are, like, a lot of houseless people, it usually was where the Ina or the island life or the land life is, like, I'll wait until people are, like, paying attention.

So we're paying attention. Okay.

Not over here. You're paying attention. You're paying So what I am what I was saying is that when you see, like, a lot of houseless people congregated, it means, like, the island life is, like, huge.

So instead of thinking about just, like, housing or commercial or whatever, maybe you could use houses people who are living there as leaders for what needs to be used for that land because they're doing drugs because they feel the land power, and there's not a lot of places to feel land power. There's not a lot of public spaces anymore.

That's what I wanna say. Thank you. Thank you.

K. Is anyone else on this measure? Again, we're not moving the measure forward if you're testifying in opposition.

Aloha Chair and Vice Chair Inouye and Members of the Committee. Kauai Hawaii stands on our testimony, in opposition to Senate Bill 3148. And we just wanna remind this committee, that laying out beach chairs on our shores is not

a public use. Building the 30 meter telescope is not a public use. Mining and logging is

not a public use. Building an Amazon warehouse is not a public use. Building a resort is not a

public use. So if you

you know, if this measure was would have passed, it would have allowed all these private uses to be considered public.

And for deferring the measure, I appreciate it.

Thank you. Okay. Is that everybody on this measure?

Thirty seconds.

And I just want

to share the section that whether you consider public uses or public uses. And, you know, all these these these uses, right, like, you know, generally, nothing prevents these uses from getting approved. All the courts said is start with a presumption of public use and access. And for some of these things, like if it's a quarry, if it's a mine, if it's office space, very easily, you can just yeah. The public shallower shouldn't be, you know, in these in these spaces.

You're gonna have a hard time, though, when it comes to beaches. And that's really what this is about. And there's a court whole court case that provides background on on what you know, just why the deal I was thinking on this. But I just wanna say, we've seen this kind of shady end runs around around the constitution, around public trust for years and years, like, most of administrations.

And so I really encourage you to for me, the bigger problem is the staff in the attorney general's office who are providing the kind of advice that leads to this kind of legislation.

So that's a long problem.

Thank you so much.

Thank you. K. Anybody else on this measure? Alright.

Yes. Aloha. So Yes.

We have several on Zoom.

I stand in strong support for I [unintelligible].

And we, I support that you deferring this.

Yes, Chair. It is.

Okay. Okay. Thank you very much.

Care no pass.

Alright. Are there any questions?

Yeah.

We have some folks that would like to testify on Zoom.

How many do we have?

We have about seven, Chair.

And are they signed up? Again?

Yes. They are signed up to testify.

Okay. I'm gonna ask those testifiers if you're willing to stand on your testimony. We are really short on time, and other people's bills, we're not gonna be able to get to. But if there is anyone, if you

could just raise your hand. And IT, if you could let us know if there's anybody there.

Aloha, my makou. My name is Jackie Keefe. Thank you for deferring this measure. I just think it's important for me to say that you've, you've mentioned respecting people's time in this meeting, but you did wait until you got to this measure to defer this measure. So, if you wanted to respect people's time, it would have actually been respectful if when you got there, you did defer this measure knowing that almost every single testimony was in opposition except by DLNR.

And I also just wanted to express that I've been really disappointed watching the way that this meeting has shook out.

There's been a lot of bickering with people that are testifying, but also just speaking over people. And I just—it's, it's not a level of respect that I wanna see from my elected representatives. So, I would just please ask you to do better. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Mr. Frankel.

Thank you. Senators, I just wanna say this bill is an embarrassment. It's embarrassing that the chair of the bill and now the former chair and the current interim chair supported it. It's embarrassing that it cleared the attorney General's Office. It's embarrassing that Governor Greene made it part of his administrative package.

It is so poorly written, and it's so poorly thought out, and the the philosophy behind it is so ill—mis, misguided. It's an embarrassment. Thank you.

Thank you. Who's next? Please proceed.

Aloha. Thank you for deferring this bill. My name is Tina Holt, and I'm in strong opposition. I couldn't say it better than, than Jackie did before, so I'll basically leave it at that. And I also would really love to remind the senators that homeless people are not to be getting gotten rid of. They're whole people in our society that need our support. Thank you.

Thank you. Is that everybody online?

Yes, chair.

Okay. That's cute. There's a heart on the screen.

Thank you. Okay. Are there any questions? Seeing none. Thank you, everybody. Let's move on to SB 2916, relating to the state archives, which appropriates funds for the planning design environmental studies for the archives.

And testifying first is DAGS.

And now, for something that made me different. Chair, vice chair, Senator, thank you for this opportunity. Representing Comptroller Keith Regan, I am Dr. Adam Jansen, your State Archivist. DAGS stands in strong support on its written testimony, and I wanna add that the master plan that we've been undergoing for the last two years is going to be done this summer to keep this project moving forward. We need these funds so that we don't...it another year.

The master plan clearly shows the building is out of space. And with Aloha Stadium shutting down and transferring 10 pallets of materials for long-term preservation, we have no place to put it. So, to keep that project moving forward, I would please ask you to consider funding this so that the plan can continue forward. Thank you.

Thank you.

Just, just a comment that we're making sure that our Hilo Archives Building is moving along as well.

If that was in my portfolio, I would love to work on that.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else here for SB 2916? Seeing none. Any other questions?

Seeing none. Alright. Let's move on to SB 2692 relating to public land, which authorizes the Department of Land and Natural Resources to acquire three eminent domain leasehold interest in the Grand Nani Loa Golf Course. And testifying first is DLNR. Thank you.

HCDA. Thank you. Okay. That's everyone who signed up to testify on 2692. Is there anyone else here on that measure?

Seeing none. Other questions? No. Okay. Thank you, everybody. Let's move on to the next measure, SB 3034, relating to coastal zone management, which is going to establish a Coastal Resilience Acquisition Leaseback Program.

Testifying first is the Department of Land and Natural Resources. Thank you. Up next is Surfrider Foundation, on Zoom.

Aloha chair, vice chair, members of the committee. My name is Hannah Lilly. I'm the Hawaii Regional Manager for Surfrider Foundation, testifying in strong support of this measure. I wanna thank Senator Lee for introducing this bill, which has sparked an important conversation as reflected in the depth of testimony that we've seen. We also really appreciate the thoughtful concerns raised by DLNR.

These implementation details can and should be clarified during this process, including the eligibility criteria, valuation standards, funding stability, and leaseback structure. However, refining details should not distract from the underlying reality, which is our—across our island, shoreline properties are increasingly no longer defensible. I wanna call attention to OPSD's 2025 Statewide Manager Treat Study. Recommendation 14 of that study specifically calls for a state-run voluntary buyout/leaseback program. SB 3034 operationalizes that recommendation and provides a statutory framework that Hawaii currently lacks.

The study was commissioned by the state to inform action and without implementing its core recommendations, we remain in a reactive posture. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify in strong support.

Thank you. Let me ask, how many people are here on this measure? 3034. Okay. Let's go through that then.

Thank you very much. So, up next is Hawaii Association for Marine Education Research. Maui Nui Resiliency Hui, on Zoom.

Aloha. Kai Nishiki, calling in from Maui. I'm here to lend my voice to our beaches and public trust resources because they can't show up to these meetings nor can they hire attorneys and high-priced lobbyists, yet our beaches and our public trust resources are the foundation of our economy and our way of life. On Maui, we are watching erosion intensify, structures become more exposed, and public risk increase.

Continuing to protect investments in increasingly hazardous shoreline areas while our beaches disappear is not long-term stewardship. The recent UHERO statewide study found that nearly 90% of Hawaii residents believe sea level rise is happening and most sea level rise is happening and most support restricting development in flood prone areas and willingness to relocate from high-risk areas. OPSD recommends exactly this legislation, and all details can be worked out and programs adjusted. Please advance this measure. Mahalo nui from Maui.

Thank you. Up next is, Kahana Based Steering Committee.

Aloha chair, vice chair, and committee members. Chris Delanae with Sanjay Government Strategies, here on behalf of Kahana Based Steering Committee. We are respectfully opposed this measure because the bill has only one option on the table, manage retreat. The bill lacks recognition of any of the comprehensive solutions to protect communities, infrastructure, and our coastlines, such as protected infrastructure, nature-based solutions. We are supportive of regional solutions that keep multiple tools on the table to solve this complex issue. Thank you for your time.

Appreciate it.

Thank you. Up next is Kaleo Schneider, or Mr. Bays.

Senator Lee, Senator Inouye, Senator Lamosao. My name is Ber, excuse me, Bernie Bays. I'm an attorney representing the Shoreline Preservation Coalition. SPC is a, an organization of community groups and individuals concerned with preserving our beaches and shorelines.

SPC opposes this bill in its present form, and maybe the easiest thing for me to do and the best thing to do is simply tell you what SPC's position is on this. SPC's position is that we should preserve the beaches and the properties on the beach for as long as we can. And in places or instances where that becomes untenable, we acknowledge that public acquisition is the right way to go, but we think that this bill is a little too specific in how that's being done.

We're trying to do a pilot project on the North Shore right now to figure out how this would actually be done. So, we oppose passing this bill out of the committee in its present form.

Thank you. That is everybody who signed up on SB 3034. Is there anyone else on this measure?

I'll just stand in support...

Thank you. Okay. That said, are there questions? We'll take a quick recess.

Alright. Reconvening the committee on Water, Land, Culture, and Arts here in Capitol 224. Thank you for your patience, everyone. I know we have a hard stop in three minutes in this room. So, what we're going to do is reconvene. We'll recess the hearing and reconvene it at 5 PM in Conference Room 229, which is a couple doors down, and we'll pick up then where we left off.

That said, while we have three minutes to go, Mr. Bays, have a, a question. If you come forward, please. If you're—if you'd like to answer a question.

Yes.

Thanks. You testified against, as well as a few of the others, but you'd mentioned there's a place for acquiring property and whatnot, in depending on the circumstances. Is that right?

That's, that's right. We've got the test project is to acquire the two Van Americk parcels, where the houses have already been destroyed and the next parcel and to require the owner of the parcel where the house is still there as part of the arrangement that he would be paid the fair market value of the house.

So, I, I, in the interest of time, what I really want to get at is, you know, we've had, I don't know, three or four separate bills now with different kinds of mechanisms and strategies and various things. You've testified along with some of the others on them as it relates to shoreline erosion and, and all this sort of stuff.

While some of those you testified in support on as potential measures to help resolve the situation, I'm just curious why oppose measures that might help other folks in other situations, in other communities or other beaches?

Because of the specifics of the way this bill is done. We don't oppose that. We oppose public acquisition of private properties to accommodate shoreline changes, where that's the only thing that can be done, and there are gonna be places like that.

Sure. So, but in the context of?

This bill.

So, you're only looking at one bill passing. You're assuming in the end, only one bill is gonna pass, I guess, is my question.

You mean 2401 or?

Or whatever.

Well, we, we support public acquisition in certain cases. We think that's gonna be necessary in certain instances, so we support that. What we don't support is the specifics of this bill. Could it be amended in ways that it could go forward and be constructive? Absolutely.

The way the bills are set up, and I didn't—they're introduced by a number of people from a number of different islands and, and so forth, but each of them encompasses a different strategy or a different mechanism or what have you.

How, how—I'm trying to understand how opposing those that don't fit your specific situation is going to help because if all of those don't move, the only one is yours, but you're making a gamble that that's the one that's gonna go, as opposed to having multiple vehicles and strategies.

That—I guess what I'm getting at is...

Could, could this be a bill be amended in a way that both the Shoreline Preservation Coalition and Kahana would support it? Yes, I believe so.

If, if it can't and if each bill is, based on its title or other restrictions, limited to one particular strategy, what then would you presume?

I, I think we need multiple strategies, so, I totally support that. It's the specifics of this bill that we have issue with.

Okay.

Not the concept at all. In fact, we would support it.

Thank you. I do wish we had more time. We're at our hard stop here. So, as I mentioned, we're going to be recessing this hearing. We're gonna be reconvening it at 5 PM down the hall in Conference Room 229.

Recess.