House Standing Committee on Labor

Good morning, everyone. I'm calling to order the House Committee on Labor. It is Thursday, 02/19/2026, 09:30am. We're in Conference Room 309. First on the agenda, we have HB 2276 for the age of the Hawaii Employer Union Health Benefits Trust Fund investment officer staff salaries.

First to testify on this measure, we have Donna Tonaki, Assistant Administrator for the Hawaii Employer-Union Health Benefits Trust Fund, in support.

Chair Faiola, board chair, and the members of the committee to the ETA stand on its testimony in support of the bill.

Thank you. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Seeing none, members, any questions? Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 2472 relating to Hawaii Employer-Union Health Benefits Trust Fund staff salaries. First to testify on this measure, we have James Wataro, Chairperson for the EUTF Board of Trustees, in support.

Okay. Any other persons here to testify on this measure?

Thank you. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Okay. Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing none. We'll be moving on to HB 1714, HD 1, relating to housing. First to testify on this measure, we have Executive Director Hakim Ouansafi from the Hawaii Public Housing Authority with comments. Okay. Thank you. Next we have Deputy Attorney General Klemen Urbanc from the deputy Attorney General's Office with comments.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I would just like to pilot a couple of things from the written testimony we submitted. Particularly, regard to the autonomy and personal matter, personnel matters. We recommend clarifying the scope of this autonomy, particularly how it's intended to interact with the civil service provisions of Chapter 76, HRS, and any applicable collective bargaining requirements under Chapter 39, HRS.

And then regarding the approval of the legislature, we recommend to avoid any potential separation of power challenge removing the legislative approval of contracts exceeding two years or removing that provision in its entirety. And I'll be available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other persons here wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Okay. Seeing none. We'll be moving on to HB 2325, HD 1. This is relating to civil service exempt positions within the Department of Land and Natural Resources.

To testify on this measure, we have acting chairperson, Ryan Kanakaole from the DLNR in support.

I'm Jessica Puff, Chair. I'm here on behalf of Ryan who's at his appointment.

Thank you. Next, we have director Mary Alice Evans from the State Hawaii Office of Planning and Sustainable Development in support.

Aloha, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Diane Suttness with the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. OPSD stands on its written testimony in support and we're available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have office of Hana Affairs in support on Zoom.

Not present.

Not present? K. Next, we have Randy Pierra, executive doctor for HGA in opposition.

Good morning, sheriff, vice chair, members. Nui Sebast for HGA. We'll stand on our testimony in opposition. I do just wanna note that, you know, we would implore the department to explore other ways to help with recruitment and retention of these employees while keeping them civil service. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Seeing none, members, we have written testimony in support from the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii. Members, any questions? Okay.

Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 1541. This is relating to the Department of Health. First test file on this measure, we have Hawaii State Hospital from the Department of Health and Support.

Good morning, chair, vice chair.

I'm Courtney Matsu, acting deputy director for behavioral health. We stand in strong support, for this bill. It's necessary to due to the uniqueness of the positions and the entities under which these positions reside. Both DDD and HSA serve vulnerable populations. DDD serves individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities and must comply with federal requirements for Hawaii's Medicaid 1915 waiver.

HSEH is an acute care psychiatric hospital that primarily serves the forensic population. Their patients have high acuity, high risk, and requires advanced expertise and training to ensure patient and staff safety, maintain regulatory and health care organization accreditation requirements, and promote a therapeutic environment that balances clinical care with security. So the specialized knowledge and experience needed in both HSH and DDD to coordinate and oversee the operational, compliance, and strategic efforts cannot be adequately classified under the existing clinical civil service classes. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Next we have Randy Perra, executive director for HGEA in opposition. Thank you. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Seeing none, members, any questions? Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 1960 HD1 related to human trafficking.

First to testify on this measure, we have Office of Hawaiian Affairs in support. Not here? Okay. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Oh, yes.

Please come up to the podium.

Morning. Llasmin Chaine for the Commission on the Status of Women, and we support this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Seeing none, members, any questions? Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 2140 HD 1 relating to central permitting positions. First to testify on this measure, we have Dr. Mary Alice Evans from the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development with comments.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Diana Setness, Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. We stand on our testimony in support of the intent and offering amendments, and I'm available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have Brandon Pereggs, executive director for HGA, in support. In support. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have Sherry Menor-Mcnamara, president and CEO for Chamber of Commerce Hawaii, in support.

I will send our written testimony to this call.

Thank you. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Seeing none, members, we do have written testimony with comments from Department of Budget and Fiscal Services from City and County of Honolulu, comments from Department of Human Resources, City and County of Honolulu, support from the Department of Planning and Permitting from City and County of Honolulu, and support from Maui Chamber of Commerce. Members, any questions? Okay.

Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 2315 HD 1 relating to state employee benefits. First to testify on this measure, we have Director of Health Kenneth Fink, from the Department of Health, in support.

Okay. Thank you. No further questions. Members, any follow-up questions? Okay. Seeing none. We'll be moving on to HB 2295, relating to government contracting. First to testify, we have Superintendent Keith Hayashi from the Department of Education in support. Not here. Okay. Next, we have Mike Pacheco from IBEW 1186 in opposition on Zoom.

Aloha, Chair and Vice Chair Mike Lee, Members of the Committee. My name is Mike Pacheco on behalf of IBEW 1186. We appreciate the opportunity to testify. We stand on our written testimony in strong opposition and are here for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other persons here to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing none. We'll be moving on to the next item, HB 1720. This is related to professional engineers.

For success on this measure, we have Director Dawn Takeuchi Apuna from the Department of Planning and Permitting from City and County of Honolulu in support.

Aloha, chair, vice chair. Yes. We stand in strong support of this bill. This is the third time it's come up. It's very important, and it's directly related to affordable housing as we, these engineers review big commercial projects, such as affordable housing.

I wanted to make a distinction that this is only to, as part of being able to sit for the licensure exam, it does not necessarily directly qualify them as being licensed. So they would still have to go before the board and go through the, the testing, etcetera, in order to be licensed. Thank you.

Thank you. Next we have President Charles Drewry from the American Council on Engineering Companies of Hawaii in opposition.

Good morning, chair and vice chair, members of the committee. My name is Sandy Wong. I'm here for the American Council of Engineering Companies. ACEC represents over 68 engineering firms. We have provided written testimony in opposition.

I just wanted to highlight. You know, the main job of engineers is to keep us safe. They build our structures, our bridges, our highways, etcetera. And so we are concerned that this bill, although well intended, will lower the standards for licensing of engineers, and so we are opposing it. In our written testimony, you know, we understand the problem that the county is having, the counties.

So we do provide some suggestions to them on how to resolve this. Obviously, as engineers, we do want the Planning and Permitting Department to be as efficient as possible, and so I'm available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you.

Next, we have Eli Lane, executive officer for the professional engineers, architects, surveyors, and landscape architects. In opposition.

Good morning. Thank you, chair, vice chair, and committee. This is Eli Lane. I'm the executive officer for the board of engineers, architects, surveyors, and landscape architects. Our testimony is in strong opposition of this measure, and I would like to we're standing on our testimony, and I'd like to highlight.

In our testimony, we included a report from the permitted in, excuse me. Permitted interaction group, and it's quite a large report. It's almost a 150 pages. But in that, I wanna highlight that Hawaii is not or excuse me.

It's important to maintain interstate reciprocity and a gold standard for requirement licensing requirements for engineers, and lowering the standards would deviate would isolate Hawaii's engineers jeopardizing their reciprocity. And also in that PIG report in appendix J, the board did months of researching and pulling for this issue. They ended up drafting a proposal for a last resort.

If there's no no other choice, they drafted a last resort bill that would provide a temporary license or a conditional license just for this situation of plan review for people that are employed by the municipality, and the license would only be currently valid for the time that they are with the municipality. As soon as they would do that employment, that that license would be expected.

So that is in the testimony. It's appendix j of the big report. I'm sorry. It's almost 150 pages, but I do wanna just highlight and honor the board's dedication and work that they did. They spent months and months and months putting that all together for you all. Thank you very much and I'm here for questions as well.

Thank you. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Okay. Seeing none, members we have written testimony in opposition from Ho'oku Consulting Engineers and an an an individual. Members, any questions?

I do have a question, for Eli Link. If you could please come up. So I would like some clarity on the function of this bill. Right? It it would allow, for planning to be considered in my it's my understanding that it would allow applying to be considered for law full experience for engineering work. Based off, director Takeuchi Apuna's statements, it would qualify them to take the test, not qualify for the license itself. Is that correct?

I believe the language of the bill is say would make it make it a 100% plan review would be qualified for licensure. But Yes. Sorry.

Okay. No. I appreciate that. Can you make a distinction between what the difference in qualification experiences are, right, for someone who's doing planning review and an engineer? Because it sounds like planning review is a section or only a portion of the scope of work that an engineer is qualified to work on.

Exactly. Currently, plan review is part of qualifying experience, but it you an applicant cannot qualify a 100 percent of their experience. It's just a plan review. And the board does accept partial experience count partial experience for a plan review. But, also decoupling the exam, which we are actively working on a rules of vision to decouple the professional the PE exam, that would allow people to take the exam without actually getting their license as well, and they can use that as experience towards getting licensure.

Sorry. Does that make sense? No. It does. Thank you.

Okay. My question next is for DPP.

Thank you, Nick.

So, again, I'll ask my first question, right, regarding the function of this bill. Based off of your testimony, it sounds like it would qualify people who have done planning review experience to take the test to become licensed.

So, they go before the board with their application and I think there's some questioning about their experience, etcetera, and then the board is the actual, they make the decision whether they can sit for the licensure exam.

What is that process?

Right. It'd be part of their application to sit for licensure for their engineering license.

Okay. Well, the board, based off of their testimony, right, respectfully disagrees with the intent of including, I guess, planning review. Right? It sounds like engineers require a little bit more expertise.

Is there something you'd like to say with regards to that statement?

Sure. Yes. Thank you. So plan review, just to understand the process of what we do, we're reviewing engineers' products pro projects. Right? So they design them, and then it's our job to review for compliance with the code.

So when they talk about lowering the standard, I don't think that's true. Like, we're checking to make sure that these projects are to code because of health and safety. So her concern that it's gonna lower standard and be a threat to life and safety is completely untrue. That's our job, to make sure these projects meet code, which stands for health and safety. But it's just a distinction because we've had engineers go before the board, and it wasn't clear.

The board would kinda just do what it wanted to, and in some respects, because some engineers don't like DPP. You know, they don't like us correcting their work, and there is this kind of culture that we're trying to address, but, it's important that there just be a distinction that this type of work, where we're reviewing these projects, it should be part of qual you know, to qualify you to, be able to sit for licensure. Like, if they don't pass, I get it.

They shouldn't get their license, but they should be able to sit based on my type of experience Because we are, definitely challenged with recruitment and retainment of engineers. I got so many new positions created in 2021 for engineers to work on commercial projects like affordable housing, etcetera, back in 2021.

Since then, I've we've struggled to retain and to recruit. And when people leave, when I do an exit engineer exit interview with an engineer, they say, you know, it'd be great if it was clear that the work that I'm doing here at DPP will qualify me for licensing. So some of these suggestions about from the PIG that, oh, well, you know, why don't you guys lower your standard? You don't need to be licensed as a DPP engineer. Why not?

Why do we have to lower our standard? You know? And then there's the issue in the PIG about, oh, others other jurisdictions don't do that. We're gonna wait to do what other jurisdictions thinks, you know, is appropriate. We have a crisis right now.

And so this is important now, and they're gonna talk about decoupling this and that for years and years. But right now, we're trying to create affordable housing. We are part of that. Right? DPP needs to review these projects in order for them to go faster and make them safe for everyone's benefit.

This is important, and it's really it's just a clarification. Look for it. This qualifies as experience. This type of experience at DPP qualifies you to sit for the exam. It really is that simple.

All this other stuff, it's just it's just, I don't know, it's just slowing things down. So even that speed task force, they ask us what will help us. I'm telling you, this is something that we've been asking for for three years.

Thank you. From the board again, Eli, could come up. So in addition to planning review, what other qualifications does an individual have to have to sit in these, meet these what, license meetings?

So the the three pillars for licensure is education, experience, and exam. So there's, the exam is a fundamental exam. That's kind of the basic that engineers get out of school with their degree. And then the professional exam is usually after a few years of experience, they have more hands on knowledge and such. Education ranges from a bachelor's degree, a master's degree, a PhD, etcetera. And depending on the education level, that dictates what level experience they need. If they have no degree currently, we have the no degree path.

We have twelve years of experience that is required. And, comprising that experience is very hands on design work. Plus, yes, there is planning to do, but there's a lot more to it as well. Design work, hands on supervision of projects, actually on the ground all that kind of stuff. And I apologize. I'm not an engineer myself. I'm just representing the board.

Okay. Thank you. Sorry. One one follow-up for, DDP. Apologies for bringing you back and forth.

Right. Let's say best case scenario for you, this bill passes through the legislature. It becomes law. Members of your staff who are doing that planning review process, you know, somehow, if they're qualified, apply for a little engineer's license, they get the license. Is there any guarantee that they will stay at DPP?

Because I think, right, one of the challenges DPP has with recruiting for engineers is also, right, salary, benefits, all that other, you know, component. So is that being addressed at all?

Yes. Yeah. And you're right. It's not just this bill or this issue about, you know, retaining and recruiting engineers. So we have them focused on that, trying to do salary differentials and and other things to bring people on board and have keep them there.

But honestly, a lot of the engineers that work at DPP, and myself included as a public servant, like, they enjoy the work that they do. They feel that they're really doing a good job for our community to protect them as far as health and safety. So, maybe it's not necessarily just the money. It's about doing good work. And so I feel like, even more so, they should be rewarded for doing good work.

They should be held at the same standards as others out there in the private industry.

Okay. Thank you. No further questions for myself. Members, any other questions on this measure? Okay.

Seeing none, we'll be moving on then. Next we have HB 2367. This is relating to employment earnings. First to testify on this measure, we have chair Alfonso Braggs from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission in support on Zoom.

Good morning, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Constance Finisher with the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission. I do wanna initially note that my office actually submitted two written testimonies, so apologies if there's if there was a little bit of confusion, but we just didn't wanna miss this one. We stand in strong support of this measure and appreciate the clarity that this bill brings by eliminating the exemption for employers with fewer than 50 employees.

This measure will better align the pay transparency section with the rest of Chapter three seventy eight, which applies to all employers with one or more employees. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next, we have Yungi Overleans from AAUW of Hawaii in support.

Good morning, Chair Sayama, Vice Chair Lee, and members of the committee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify in strong support. We stand on our written testimony, but I wanted to emphasize two, make two additional points. This pay transparency is good for all business, not just medium and large businesses, but small businesses as well.

If Sandy Ma, who's also a member of AAUW, was here, she'll tell you that her family owned a Chinese restaurant, a small business, and they were tight with all their budget and exactly how much they spent on paying employees, that something like this would've helped them to manage it better with the expectation.

And that is the point that Society of Human Resource Management made, which I we included in our testimony, and that's from small businesses' perspective. From large business perspective, when I managed at IBM, we started to use paid transparency with our employees. This was going back to year 2000, so a while back. And it ended up being a retain retainer tool. I was able to because we are transparent with what the salary range is, and they could easily see where they fit.

We are able to use it to actually retain the employees. And now I know the millen millennials and gen g's expect this. Employees expect that. Gen x's and boomers didn't expect it, but now employees expect it. So please make this a reality for all businesses and employees here.

Thank you for listening.

Thank you. Next, we have Elizabeth Juvan Fujiwara, senior partner for Fujiwara and Rosebaum LLC in support on Zoom. Not present? Not present. Okay.

Next, we have Michael Iosua Iosua, sorry, from state director for NFIB in opposition. K. Not here.

K. Are there any other persons here to testify on this measure? Please come to the podium.

Yes. I'll go after you. Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and committee members. My name is Jean Evans. I retired after forty years here in Hawaii in, nonprofit organizations, mostly health and human services, and, I'm also on the board, AAUW.

You have my testimony. I just wanna make a couple of points. Aye, over the years, I've held two executive director positions in nonprofit organizations with a number of employees between sixteen and twenty five. The first place that I applied, I had no idea what the salary range was. I asked.

They said it was flexible. Oh, okay. And then they offered me a position and the salary, it sounded good, it was a raise from what I had gotten before. And I took it, I felt really good for a couple months till I found out that my predecessor had made over twice as what I had been paid. And I was just super angry, embarrassed for being so naive, and got me looking for a job right away.

On the other hand, I've been, interviewed over hundreds and hundreds of, applicants over the years, And I ended up wasting a lot of time, as you've heard before, interviewing people who would not work for what I could offer. I knew what I could offer. It's in our budget. I need that. But it wasn't the practice to do that.

It was You know, we have a really low unemployment rate here, one of the lowest in the nation, and the turnover is really high. So anything that can help that would be really a a good idea. You know, executives who or employees will always complain about any new regulation or requirement. I certainly did over the years. Grumble here, go and go, gotta do this.

But in the majority of those instances with a nudge, this one is a required nudge, things actually turned out better. It made good business practices, it was safety, it was at voice satisfaction, and so it's a win win situation here. Please, thank you.

Thank you.

Llasmin Chaine from the Commission on the Status of Women. We stand in support of this measure and these pay transparency practices. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other persons here to testify on this measure? Seeing none, members, we do have written testimony in support from the Hawaii State Democratic Women's Caucus, Hawaii Women's Lawyers, opposition from Maui Chamber of Commerce, support from the Hawaii Appleseed Center for Law and Economic Justice, and 11 individuals in support. Members, any questions? Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 1935 relating to personal information.

First to testify on this measure, we have Deputy Attorney General, Jon Min Lee from Department of Attorney General's office with comments.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Good morning. Charles Jeong Min Lee, deputy attorney general. We noticed some, implementation issues in this bill, so we've written our written comments about that, so and,

I'll be available

for any questions that you have.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have Executive Director Kirsten Izumo Nitao from the Hawaii State Campaign Spending Commission with comments.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Christy Chang from the Campaign Spending Commission. The commission has strong concerns with the administration of this bill, specifically, the Hawaii campaign finance law requires, transparency to the public, which provides a full disclosure of names and addresses from candidates, candidate committees, and contributors. And this law would require us to redact that information.

And, also, we point out in our testimony the burden that it would place on our office because we only have five staff and the number of committees and the information that's contained on those disclosure reports.

And then also section two of the bill appears to provide administrative and decision making process, which is outside of the scope of what our office is equipped to do. So if this committee decides to pass this bill, we'd ask for additional time, for us to determine how to comply. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have UPW in opposition.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members, again, common contact. I'm Lou and public work phrase. You have a written testimony in opposition. We think this bill is well

intentioned. We appreciate, the first section, page two lines of eleven twenty one, that mandates government agencies to redact or remove the home addresses of public servants, which in this case would include rank and file public workers. However, we are fiercely opposed to the subsequent section regarding disclosure and objection two. We think the threshold and burden, is not appropriate for rank and file public employees, and we think that it could actually undermines in in a indirectly, Chapter 89.

But, happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. Any other persons here

to testify on this measure?

Oh, yes, please.

Sorry. Participants submitted written testimony. Ino Hara, Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, business registration division. We just offered written comments, and we stand on that and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Any other person here to testify on this measure? Seeing none, members, we do have written testimony with comments from OIP, League of Women Voters Hawaii in opposition, Public First Law Center in opposition, Uba with comments. That's it. Members, any questions?

Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 2388 relating to public notice. First to testify on this measure, we have deputy attorney general Jim Minh Lee from AG's office with comments.

Good morning again, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. We also noted some implementation concerns regarding this bill. We submitted our written comments. I'll be available for any questions.

Thank you. Next, we have administrator Bonnie Kahakui from the State Procurement Office with comments on Zoom.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Bonnie Kahakui, administrator, State Procurement Office. We stand on our written testimony providing comments. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next we have County Clerk Moana Lutey from the Office of County of... Sorry. From the Office of the County Clerk from County of Maui in support on Zoom.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members. My name is Moana Lutey, and I am the County Clerk for the County of Maui. I am testifying in support of this bill. My office is responsible for posting a number of notices and so forth in our newspaper of general circulation regularly.

And last year, our budget was $60,000. This year, we increased it to $75,000 and believe that this is just not efficient or cost effective way to handle publication of public notices. I'll give you an example. Maui News, which is our newspaper of general circulation, publishes once a week.

So for us to be able to make the deadlines that are required by council, we have to be very careful on timing. And when we aren't able to meet those deadlines, we have to go through the Star Advertiser, which is about double the cost. We passed 10 bills at second and final reading.

Those bills cost us approximately $200 per bill to post. So you're talking about $2,000 every other week just in basic things that we need to provide to the public. So we are in support of not mandating that and changing the law, and I am available for questions if you have any.

Okay. Thank you. Next we have Layne Silva, director for the liquor control from the Office of the Mayor, County Maui in support.

Yes. Good morning. My name is Layne Silva. I'm the Director of the Department of Liquor Control on the County of Maui. We stand behind our written support testimony, and I will remain on the call if there are any questions.

Thank you. Next, we have Peter Fritz, individual in opposition on Zoom.

Chair, Vice Chair. My name is Peter Fritz. I'm an attorney. I have experience drafting legislation. I have experience drafting legislation with disability access, and I myself am a person with a disability. This bill would let state and county agencies replace mandatory newspaper publications with postings on their own website or a newspaper. It's their choice. Go find the notice. Where is it today? I have three basic concerns. First, fragmentation.

Current law requires a single designated publication per item per island. One predictable place to find notices. This bill eliminates that requirement without specifying how a new place will be chosen. Citizens will have to check multiple agency websites or simply miss the notices. Was the notice published on the permitting and processing website?

Was something posted under the web solid waste removal? Where's the notice? Was it posted and hidden in a newspaper even though it was normally posted on a website? Second, there's a digital divide problem. Those who have internet access and those who don't.

A number of Hawaii households lack high speed Internet access. Furthermore, I'm a kupuna. Many of my other kupunas rely entirely on print media. Third, government websites frequently post image based PDFs that are incompatible with screen readers, leaving individuals with disabilities such as me that uses them from time to time unable to access these notices.

This bill does not include WCAG world, I'm sorry, web content accessibility guidelines or requirements that it comply with the ADA. And there's no protocol for when a website fails during a notice period. Is it extended? Is it, does it have to be renoticed?

What are the particular requirements, and how are they to be satisfied? Third, I cited evidence from Florida, a 2026 working paper that studied Florida's similar reform. After local government could shift notices online, newspapers notices dropped 37%.

But interestingly, website traffic didn't increase. So you can't say it's more accessible. Public meeting attendance fell 14%. And commercial zoning permits went up 35%, which kind of indicates that, consistent with reduced public awareness of developmental proceedings, that people just don't know about it.

Apologies, Mr. Fritz. Your two minutes is up. If you could please summarize your testimony.

Yes. If the committee... There are a lot of gaps in here that haven't been filled or that remain to be answered by the committee and in legislation. I think that the, if it's going to move forward, then it should require dual notice, both print and digital, a centralized portal, mandatory WCAG compliance and ADA compliance, and addressing what happens with website failure and whether or not they need to be extended. And most importantly, tamper proof digital archiving, which newspapers provide.

I respectfully request that the committee hold these and that the drafters of this bill go back and look at some of these circumstances as well as addressing what the AG raised as potential problems and how to address them in terms of the statutory notices in other places. I thank you for your consideration.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fritz. Are there any other persons here to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, we do have written testimony with comments from Office of Information Practices. Members, any questions?

Questions for the AG's office. So you noted in your written testimony there are repealing certain exemptions in different parts of HRS will have certain unintended consequences. And is it that your recommendation is to reinstate these existing exemptions?

Yes. Correct. Particularly 103D, 130F, 127A, 523A, as well as we should add a savings cost so it doesn't affect any statutes regarding foreclosure, condemnations, things of that nature.

And this will allow the intent of the bill, again, to not to replace existing notice mechanisms, but to supplement them.

Correct. If the committee would like, I have suggested language exactly written down so for your consideration. I apologize.

Thank you. Alright. No further questions. If not, we'll be moving on to HB 2388. I'm sorry.

HB 2387. This is relating to workers' compensation medical benefits. First to testify, we have no one. Okay. We do have written testimony, but is there any other persons here to testify on this?

K. Seeing none, we do have written testimony in support from DLIR and five individuals in support. Seeing that there's no one to question, we'll be taking a short recess recess.

K. Seeing none, we do have written testimony in support from DLIR and five individuals in support. Seeing that there's no one to question, we'll be taking a short recess recess.

Morning. Reconvening the House Committee on Labor for decision making.

First, we have HB 2276 relating to Hawaii Employer Union Health Benefit Trust Fund investment office staff salaries. For this, we'll be passing this forward with a defective date of 07/01/3000. Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on House Bill 2276. Recommendation is to pass with amendments. Yes. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Representative Garrett?

Aye.

Representative Kapela?

Aye.

Representative Reyes Oda? Aye. And Representative Kong is excused. Thank you, chair. Recommendation is being adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 2472 relating to Hawaii Employer Union Health Benefit Trust Fund staff salaries. Similarly, we'll be passing this forward with, defective date of 07/01/3000. Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on House Bill 2,472. Recommendation is to pass with amendments. Noting the excused absence of Representative Kong. Are there any no votes?

Reservations? No. Reservations, Representative Rayzota. Thank you, Chair. Recommendation's been adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 1714 HD one relating to housing. My recommendation is to pass this measure forward as is, though we'd like to acknowledge, concerns, made by the attorney general's office with regards to the bill's ambiguity of scope. We believe it's appropriate for this measure to move forward so that the different stakeholders can work these differences together. Members, any comments?

Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair voting on House Bill 1714 HD1. Recommendation is to pass as is. No votes and reservations? Reservations. Reservations, Representative Reyes Oda.

Thank you Chair. Recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 2325 HD1 relating to civil service exempt positions within the Department of Land and Natural Resources. Recommendation is to pass this measure forward as is. Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on House Bill 2,325 HD1. Recommendation is to pass as is. Are there any no votes? Reservations?

Thank you, Chair. Recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 1541 HD1 relating to the Department of Health. Recommendation is to pass with amendments, making technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style. Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on house bill 1541 HD1. Recommendation is to pass with amendments. Are there any no votes or reservations? Thank you, Chair.

Recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 1960 HD 1 relating to human trafficking. Recommendation is to pass this measure forward as is. Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, chair. Voting on House Billl 1960 HD 1. Recommendation is to pass as is. Any no votes or reservations? Thank you, Chair.

Recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 2140 HD 1, relating to central permitting positions. Recommendation is to pass this measure forward with amendments. We'll be adopting Department of Human Resource, Department of Human Resources, suggested amendments to include language to clarify candidates must meet the minimum qualification requirements. We'll be replacing, the term personnel department with hiring department.

I will be changing the date of termination of the pilot program to 12/31/2030. This is to match the date which the revenue source of this pilot program will end. We'll be making, technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style. Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on House Bill 2140 HD 1. Recommendations pass with amendments. Are there any no votes or reservations? Thank you, Chair. Recommendations been adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 2315 HD one relating to state employee benefits. Recommendation is to pass this measure forward as is. Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair.

We're in hospital 2315 HD one. Recommendation is to pass as is. Are there any no votes or reservations? Thank you, Chair. Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next, we have HB 2295 relating to government contracting. Recommendation is to defer this measure. Members, any comments? Seeing none, moving on to HB 1720 relating to professional engineers.

Recommendation is to defer this measure. I continue to have concerns regarding the scope of work, for engineers and, the qualifications for a planning reviewer meets those qualifications. I understand and empathize with DVP with regards to their hiring issues and retaining qualified employees, but I don't think this is the vehicle to do it. So I encourage them to continue to address those issues through existing, you know, recruitment and retention, initiatives. Mad members, any comments?

Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 2367 relating to employment earnings. Recommendation is to pass this measure with amendments. Adding a definition for page 1, lines 5; covered employee to clarify the employee is a full time, part time, temporary, or seasonal employee. Adding technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style. Also adding an effective effective date of 07/01/3000.

Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on House bill 2367. Recommendation is to pass with amendments. Are there any no votes or reservations? Thank you, Chair. Recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 1935 relating to personal information. Recommendation is to defer this measure. Share some of the concerns that were expressed in the testimony regarding the administrative capabilities, for the different agencies to administer this particular law while I do appreciate the intent of this measure. Members, any comments?

Seeing none, we'll be moving on to HB 2388 relating to public notice. We'll be adopting AG amendments to retain exemptions in chapters 103 d, 103 f, 127 a, and 523 a within HRS. We'll be adopting AG amendments also to add a savings clause confirming amended sections 1-28.5. HRS does not supersede or alter more specific notice requirements imposed by other statutes unless expressly stated, adding a defective date of 07/01/3000, and adding technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style.

Members, any comments?

Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on house bill 2388. Recommendation is to pass with amendments. Are there any no votes? Reservations?

Thank you, Chair. Recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to HB 2387 relating to workers' compensation medical benefit. Recommendation is to pass the same measure with amendments adding a defective date. Effective date of 07/01/3000. Members, any comments?

Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on house bill 2387. Recommendation is to pass with amendments. Are there any no votes or reservations? Thank you, Chair. Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. And finally, moving on to HB 2358 relating to retirement. This is a measure that this committee had heard on Tuesday. We are going to adopt the governor amendments offered by the governor's office. This would be to include areas of the Department of Law Enforcement into this measure.

So we will have, passed out, the suggested amendments to the members, for your review. Members, any questions or comments on that new, draft of this bill? Okay. Seeing none, we'll be moving forward of voting on HB 2358. Vice chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on House Bill 2358. Recommendations to pass with amendments. Are there any no votes or reservations?

Thank you, Chair. Recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. Alright. That is it for the agenda on this on this that's it for this agenda. We'll adjourn. Thank you.

Okay. We're convening the House Committee on Labor. It is Thursday, 02/19/2026, 10:45AM. We're in Conference Room 309. First on the agenda and only on the agenda, we have HB 2119 HD1 relating to coffee pest control.

First to testify on this measure, we have Jerperson, Sharon Herr from Hawaii Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity in support.

Aloha. Hello. And Vice Chair, members of the committee. I am Esther Reichert on behalf of the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. We stand on our, written testimony in support and offer comments on this bill.

Thank you. Next, we have executive director Brian Miyamoto from the Hawaii Farm Bureau in support. He's not here. Next, we have President Ryerson Nakamatsu, Hawaii Coffee Association in support on Zoom.

Not present.

Not present. Okay. Any other proceeds here to testify on this measure? Seeing none, members, we do have written testimony and support from the Hawaii Food and Policy, the Hawaii Farmers Union, Kau Coffee Growers Cooperative, Kona Coffee Farmers Association, Rusty Hawaiian Coffee, and an individual in support. Members, any questions?

Seeing none, we'll just roll straight into decision making then. Okay. We have HB 2119, HD 1 relating to coffee pest control. Recommendation is to pass this measure forward as is knowing the concerns that were brought up by testifiers. We will delegate those financial concerns to the finance committee.

Okay. Members, any comments? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Thank you, Chair voting of House Bill 2119 HD 1. Recommendations to pass as is. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Representative Garrett? Aye.

Representative Kapela? Aye. Representative Kong? Aye. Representative Reyes Oda?

Aye. Thank you, Chair. Recommendations been adopted. Thank you, members.

The steering is adjourned.