Senate Standing Committee on Education

Aloha and welcome to a joint hearing with the Senate Committee on Economic Development and tourism and commerce and government operations. Today is Thursday, 02/19/2026. These are 1PM agenda and we are in Conference Room 229. This hearing is being streamed live on YouTube. We have a one minute time limit for all testifiers.

Joining me today is Senator McKelvey and g government operations committee. First up, first up, we have two bills on this agenda. First bill up is Senate bill 2627. Senate draft 1 relating to economic development tourism, exempts the Hawaii tourism authorities contracts or agreements for sports projects and events and marketing activities from the Hawaii Public Procurement Code and all other requirements of law for competitive bidding. First up, Caroline Henderson, Inter President and CEO for Hawaii Tourism Authority.

Thank you. Next up, Bonnie Kahakui, State Procurement Office. Thank you. Next up, James Tokioka, Department of Business and Economic Development and Tourism, in support. And then Keoni Shizuma individual with comments.

Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure?

Good afternoon senators, for Director Russell Homa, Apen Kauai, Arthur of the group. Excuse me from my dress up today with my vest here. We're looking at a biker and a former one racer here because I wanna bring back the F1 FedEx racing gear again like we did before. And I think we can have a venue for that, but I know the Hawaii tourism floor just gotta promote that sports tourism here.

And hopefully, we can bring the Vegas guys over here and, kinda get I know that Vegas doesn't really think that they can proceed, so we can either win their contract and bring it over here.

But we need a lot of supporters here with the fellow policy makers so we can make this a reality. So I think that penal code needs to be reclassified some issues in there with sports terrorism using the convention center as a venue as well and other means. And, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to testify.

Thank you, Russell. Anybody else wishing to testify on the measure?

Seeing none. Members, any questions?

Oh, yeah. Ma'am? Oh. So you you you spelled about the Formula one racing. Right?

You just said something about Formula one?

Yes, sir.

So you know that Hawaiian Homes with Campwood, the Oakland Dam is looking into making a formula one track out there in.

I heard a little bit about that, but I haven't really looked into the details. But I need they need to publicize that to the general public, I think, with the the formula one industry that we're willing to have that kind of infrastructure in Hawaii.

Yeah. So they're they're thinking about building it even though I don't agree with the vendor, but, hey, it's gonna be a racing track. So hopefully, you guys could be able to capitalize on that and working with the tourism, HTA guys that try to promote something over that that track.

Yeah. I think so.

I think that was a penal code that, on this bill mentions about, maybe we can do the bidding process. Kinda kinda be might mean this to be readjusted for that matter.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

Senator thank you. Senator Moriwaki? Bonnie Espio.

Good afternoon, senators.

So, going to your testimony, I can see the problem with exempting, from procurement, going out to bid and so forth. Is there any way and and knowing that the the HTA is looking for expediting, especially those opportunities for sporting events and so forth.

Can you see a way that there could be a marriage of, some oversight or at least some way in which we curtail what they do so that it's based on really trying to promote or get, contracts, in place quickly for sporting events, but the marketing part might be broad. But do you have any language that you could provide for us on how we could streamline it or focus it in a little bit more?

Thank you for the question. Yes. I think that we can work on the language. I would like to say that the the way the build is written and marketing events to me is is very broad. That could encompass just about any kind of marketing activities for conventions, for sporting events, for any kinds of things.

So if we narrow the focus on this sporting events, sporting project events, and marketing events Correct.

Just for related to

Specifically related to the sporting event, I think that could be worked out.

So you're comfortable with that?

I would be comfortable with that.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

Thank you.

Should we, I mean, consider I know, at this point, it might be too late, but having, when this exemption is exercised notification given to you in your office?

If you put it in the bill?

Yeah.

They would still have to exercise.

It would have an exemption, but you would be notified when they're exercising said exemption for said sporting events. You know?

It could. That could be put in the put in the bill with the approval of the chief procurement officer. Just keep in mind, if there is an exemption, we would probably follow the same course that we do now which is post the exemption for a minimum of seven days so that it's available to the general public for their comment, if they should have a comment.

Okay. So that's already baked into the process now?

That's baked into the process if they come in with an exemption. But if you leave the language just exempt for sporting events and and events and marketing activities to sporting events, then they would not come in. You would have to specifically lay out with approval of the chief procurement officer.

Just a question to follow on. So would that delay the process, or what what kind of time frame do you have? Because they're saying we've got it this is time sensitive. We have to move quickly. How much of a time frame do you need to turn it around if they come in and we say we wanna do it?

We I think thank you for the question. So I think there's two options available. We can have it upon approval or with approval of the CPO, or we can just say, you have this exemption, and you and you have to submit that exemption or you have to submit that event. So that we at least have record on it and we can look on a spot check it. Are you still?

That's what we got behind just to have a record of it so there can be some spot checking after the fact. So in case we have another blowout like what happened before, there are some checks in place.

Yeah. I think because if we do the exemption route, then we do have that delay. We have that minimum of seven days. So if it's really time sensitive, you're going to run into that issue. But if you notify the state procurement office or notify the chief procurement officer of that event, then at least they're not waiting for us to respond to them.

But we're they're notifying us, and we can always we can at least monitor it, or we can keep track of what events are happening that are using this exemption. And if we feel if in the future there are some events that may challenge this bill, at least we can say this is what they reported to us and have that mechanism in place. Right now, we don't have anything in place.

So the language you would be looking at is reporting of any use of the exemption for sporting events.

That would be most most expeditious as opposed to receiving a CPO approval.

Yes. Correct.

K.

Thank you. Thank you, chief. Thanks, Charlie.

Any other questions? Senator Wakai.

Charlie Anderson. I'm trying to find out the necessity for this measure. Can you give us an example of where there was a sporting event that we lost because we weren't quick to respond?

Thank you, Senator. I don't know if I'm trying to think off the top of my head. But I do know that exemptions will help us with sporting events. I know it does take time for us to, you know, negotiate, even put out RFPs and, you know, knowing the importance of sporting events, knowing the economic the economic impact it has, the also, how it drives, visitation to the islands and that media exposure.

It's an it's important for us to act swiftly in some cases to make sure that we can, seize the opportunity for, especially, bigger sporting events to the islands.

Yeah. I mean, can can we tighten the the the language, at least for the sporting events where I understand that you have to be nimble, but in in certain sports, there's only one league to go to. Right? It's not like we we want an NFL game. Who else on the planet plays American football?

Or if you go to the PGA, there's only one league or entity that actually, you know, puts on those kinds of global golf trips. I I understand that this where this could be super helpful when it's obvious there's only one entity, one NBA, one Major League Baseball League, one whatever.

So that as we tighten up this language to, Senator McKelvey and Moriwaki's commentary, in addition, say that this procurement, if there's only one player out there or league out there, that that would allow for you to kick in the the exemption for procurement. I see.

Good. Yeah. It's a sole sourcing. Yeah.

It's tightens. Yeah.

Yep. That tightens. Yeah.

I can I understand what you're saying, Senator? There there are instances where sorry. I'm I'm just trying to think off the top of my head. Maybe I'll ask our CAO.

Right. Because even, like, with the PGA, I mean, although the PGA is well known in America, there are other professional leagues that Japan has a professional league, Korea has special Yeah. Professional league. And, in that particular case, we should be exploring what other foreign leagues or or organizations are out there that might respond to putting on a golf tournament rather than always we're going back to the PGA year after year after year.

Yeah. These different organizations shop destinations when it comes to this type of events. So as an example, ESPN is looking for, say, a basketball or volleyball tournament. They're shopping different markets to move it. And especially with NIL money in play, that puts us at a disadvantage as well.

So having the opportunity to be able to react, especially if the opportunity is in conjunction with international teams being brought in, that's why we're looking for this exemption.

Okay.

So so you guys don't have a problem with us tightening up the language on just, because at this point, it's sports marketing and just so we're looking at just sports. And then sports events only along with what procurement officer has said in her testimony.

Okay. You guys work with that?

Yes. Okay. Okay.

Any other questions? No. That's it.Seeing none. Moving on to. Thank you.

We are going to pass this with an SD 1 by requiring the HTA to submit annual reports to the Procurement Office, detailing those sports projects, events, and activities, lining out marketing that did not go out to competitive bidding, narrowing it down to sport events only, a notification per procurement officer that provided that the agency shall report to the chief procurement office the contract details no later than 30 days after contract execution, using the language from State Procurement's testimony and discussion in today's hearing to also include that that reporting goes back to State Procurement Office as well. Any discussion, members?

Defect the date, too.

Oh, yeah. Sorry. And defecting the date to July 1st, 2050. Good catch. Any discussion?

That's what I live for.

Seeing none, Vice Chair Wakai for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll call]. Chair, your recommendation's adopted.

Thank you.

Oh, GEO, same recommendation. Senate Draft 1, I vote yes.

On SB 2627, Chair's recommendation's to pass with amendments. Chair votes aye. Vice Chair votes aye. [Roll call]. Measure's adopted. Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry, I gotta go back. Passing with an SD 2-- sorry. Passing with an SD 2, and everything else what I said prior to, I said the SD 1.

Yep.

Okay. Okay. So, I'm sorry. They were the SD 1 early. So it should have been an SD 2. Same recommendation, just to add it as an SD 2. Any discussion, members? Seeing none--I'm sorry--Vice Chair Wakai for the vote again. Chair goes aye.

Anybody on EDT wanna change their vote? Okay, it passes.

Thank you. Government Operations, same recommendation. Does anybody wanna change their vote? Seeing none, the recommendation still stands about.

Thank you.

Thank you. Sorry, moving on to Senate Bill 2074, relating to state facilities. Amend-- passing with an SD 1 by removing references to the Convention Center and naming rights due to concerns raised by the HTA and the Department of Budget and Finance relating to tax consequences, including insertion of a new conforming section in Chapter 102 HRS, clarifying that the chapter does not apply to concessions within the Stadium Facility and making necessary technical non-substantive changes and defecting the date to July 1st, 2050. Any discussion?

Was it a not apply or apply?

Does not apply.

So inside of the stadium?

No, it does not apply to concessions within the stadium. Okay. Vice Chair Wakai for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll call]. Chair, your recommendation's adopted.

Thank you.

And Government Operations, same recommendation. Senate Draft 1, I vote yes.

[Roll call]. The measure is adopted.

Okay.

Thank you. With that, we are adjourned.

Hello, and welcome to the hearing with the Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism. This is our 1:05 p.m. agenda. We are here for decision-making on three bills. First bill up is Senate Bill 2716, relating to cooperatives. After careful discussion, you know, while this is a good idea to look at cooperatives, we are going to defer this bill. On-- next.

Next up, Senate Bill 2374, relating to a blue economy. It establishes the Blue Economy Working Group to study how to develop and support marine-based economic activities that align with the state's decarbonization and restorative food production goals. It requires a report to the Legislature. We are gonna pass it with an SD 1 by defecting the date to July 1st, 2050. Note, AN passed Senate Bill 2374 with the same SD 1 on Wednesday, February 18, 2026. Members, any discussion? Seeing none, Vice Chair Wakai for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll call]. Chair, your recommendation's adopted.

Thank you. Short recess.

Sorry, members. I skipped over one of the bills: Senate Bill 2698, relating to transportation. Oh, there's been some challenges on this bill. We're gonna pass this with an SD 1 by taking into consideration part of the Attorney General's recommendations, questions that were raised by General Fund contributions in Section 5. We will not address-- we'll make changes on page 2, line 6, deleting these words: appropriations made by Legislature for deposit into the fund.

That will be deleted from the bill. We will also take DOT's recommended amendments. This bill was also passed early on in Transportation with the exact same language. Members, any discussion? Seeing none, Vice Chair Wakai for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll call]. Chair, your recommendation's adopted.

Thank you, and with that, we are adjourned.

Aloha, and welcome to the joint hearing with the Senate Committees on Economic Development, Tourism, and Education. This is our 1:06 p.m. agenda. With us today is Education Chair and Committee, Senator Kim. We're here for decision-making on Senate Bill 2816, relating to state enterprise zones. Never in my craziest mind would I think I would be actually making all these amendments, but here we go.

Brace yourselves. We will be passing this with an SD 1 by one, updating Section 2 definitions in Section 209E-2 HRS at the following new definition for an innovation enterprise: innovation enterprise means an area located on property owned by the State of Hawaii that is intended to support or currently contains businesses primarily engaged in biomedical or life sciences research, clinical trials, medical technology development, pharmaceutical manufacturing, aerospace technology research and development, space domain awareness or information technology design, and production services.

Two: update Section 3 designation limits in Section 209E-4 HR. Add a new Subsection C to read as follows: C, the department may declare up to two census tracks in the state that contain an innovation enterprise to be designated as an enterprise zone, subject to the governor's approval. Three, adding a new section, comprehensive review; insert a new uncodified section, mandating a comprehensive review of the program, but it's Department of Business and Economic Development and Tourism.

The text should read Section 6A, the department, in consultation with the Department of Taxation, shall conduct a comprehensive review of the State Enterprise Zones Program established under Chapter 209E Hawaii Revised Statutes. B, the comprehensive review shall include, one, an evaluation of the economic impact of the program, including the number of jobs created and the types of industry supported to an assessment of whether existing enterprise zones continue to meet the statutory eligibility criteria for designation.

Three, revenues generated by the participating companies by county. C, the department shall submit a report of its findings to the Legislature no later than 20 days prior to the convening of the regular session of 2027. The department shall do this review in house for renumbering the remaining sections of the bill accordingly, make any technical and non-substantive amendments, and defecting the effective date to July 1st, 2050. Period. Any discussion?

Can you repeat that again?

You could snapshot this for our record. Seeing none, Vice Chair Wakai for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll call]. Chair, your recommendation's adopted.

Thank you. Chair, I wanna thank you for your amendments and to keeping the enterprise zones whole as to the whole intent. So I appreciate that. So the same recommendation for the Committee on Education: do pass with a SD 1. Chair votes aye.

Thank you.

Members, SB 2816. Chair's recommendation's to pass with amendment. Chair votes aye. Vice Chair's excused. [Roll call]. Chair, recommendation's adopted.

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

Hello, and welcome to the joint hearing with the Senate Committee's Economic Development, Tourism, and Water, Land, Culture and the Arts. This is our 1:02 p.m. agenda. We have a one-minute time limit for all testifiers. Chair Chris Lee-- Senator Lee, who's joining us along with the Water, Land, and Culture and Arts Committee. This agenda has six bills.

You know, I know we are short on time today. We have your testimonies. If you can stand on your testimonies, that would be super helpful. So let's get started. So first up, the testifiers list, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. DAB, please. 2156.

The department stands on its written testimony, offering comments and <unintelligible>.

Thank you. Next up, Georja Skinner with Creative Industries, DBEDT.

Georja Skinner, DBEDT. Creative Industries supports the intent with some comments added. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Barry Cheung for Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Oh. Chair, <unintelligible> but I'm with the department <unintelligible>.

Thank you. Next up, Lauren Yasaka. Oh, okay. Thank you. Too good. You can zoom in in person. Next up, Director Tokioka from Department of Business and Economic Development.

Yeah, he supports the intent. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next up, Mary Alice Evans for Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. Mary Alice.

Chairs and members, first of all, apology for the late testimony. Second of all, apology for wanting to explain my testimony. We support DBEDT's intent, but we offer a-- I think, a simple solution, and that is to amend HRS Chapter 201-14, which is the consolidated film permitting processing, little section that's already in HRS, and to add the Oversight Commission to that subsection as a new subsection rather than an entirely new part.

And I would also say that the amendments to Chapter 205 to 102-4.5, which adds filming as a permitted use to the Ag District is appropriate, but the change to Chapter 205-6, special needs permits, would subject film permits for a special needs permit process that was designed for long-term, substantive uses, and its intention slow and careful. That was not fit for women's <unintelligible> needs at all.

Thank you, Mary Alice. Your time is up. Thank you. Next up, Valea Constantino with Honolulu Film Office.

I'll stand on our written testimony, supporting the intent of water to <unintelligible> publicly with the testimony of Director Evans.

Thank you. Next up-- Valea, I got you two times for Coalition of County Film Offices in Hawaii as well.

Yes, I think on the other hat, the Coalition of County Film Offices were concerned about the timeframe that the current bill would be quoting. So again, supporting the intent, but it did not undermine the process and for our support to the comments that were recommended this morning.

Okay. Thank you. Next up, Irish Barber, testifying for Hawaii Film Alliance, on Zoom.

Sorry I'm driving. Aloha, Chairs, Vice Chairs, and members of the committee. We stand on our written comments that this needs more discussion with subject matter experts. Mahalo.

Thank you, Irish. Please pull over. Angela Young.

Aloha. Angela Melody Young, CARES, in strong favor of this legislation, and-- so, I think what the committee can consider is to take a peek at all the other policies that are effective, for example, California, Hollywood, where farmers typically generate revenue by acting as location scouts or renting their land to production companies. So in Hollywood, farmers and location scouts build partnerships by listing properties in professional databases, engaging with film commissions and negotiating location agreements that turn rural Ag land into profitable, short-term film sets, right?

So if, in Hawaii, the committee wishes to enact an effective policy, then it should ask, perhaps, advice from the industry that knows what it's doing. And so, I think it's a good starting point in coordination with the appropriate county planning offices to--

Thank you, Angela. Your time is out.

Yeah. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Sydney Haas with Hawaii Food and Policy, with comments, Sherry Menor, Chamber of Commerce, in support, Daniel Hamilton-Lowe, with comments, Gennaro Galderma, support, Bryan Spicer, in support, Kristin Sifton, in support, and Kristen Zazueta, in support. Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Question for DBEDT. Georja, who currently regulates the film production on Ag lands?

Well, it has to go through a complicated process, and I would like to ask Mary Alice to also come up and assist with it because we have been faced with this many times, and on Hawaii Island in particular, which has the lion's share of our agricultural lands. And we think that it's really important to be able to streamline.

So, I think there's a lot of elements in the proposed measure, and I think working together with the introducers and OPSD, I think Mary Alice has a good recommendation on streamlining this to be able to come into the current film permitting process.

So, Mary-- so, you know, who currently regulates the film production on the Ag lands? So I'm sure there's several--

You've get Ag, you have the county-- landowner, county.

It's complicated.

Public landowner, private landowner, the Chapter 205-6 special use permit process, the land boards', like, amendment process, the state film offices, facilitated film permits. It is complicated. The Oversight Committee, especially if it's placed in the existing section for consolidated film permitting, would seek to streamline that while protecting Ag. I do want to ensure that, you know, we understand the state Ag District, which also has 23 permitted uses at the moment.

That 24th permitted use would be very helpful and useful, but not the state's Land Use Commission special use permit process, which the counties also are required to conduct because that is a very careful, slow-- intentionally slow, because it's supposed to provide a decision-making process for things like landfills, quarries, you know, things that are going to be there for decades and decades.

Filming is a temporary, usually very short-term, and it generally does not do land disturbance. It, you know, is able to mitigate and move as soon as it's done, and it generates agricultural accessory income for the farmer. It can generate income for--

So, Mary Alice, how expeditious will an agriculture film production land use oversight committee be in helping field producers obtain permits to film on agriculture lands?

If it is given the ability to issue a special use permit just for filming on Ag lands, it can be very expeditious.

But anything else with having to excavate on area to set up could be cumbersome. Got it. Thank you.

Can I ask a question then, further? But you still need Land Use Commission approval because I thought you just said it can be expeditiously done.

Chapter 205-6, as opposed to Chapter 205-4.5, lays out the statutory basis for the Land Use Commission and the County Planning Commissions in Oahu, the County Council, to--or City Council--to conduct a special use permit process. I would refer you to the Waimanalo Gulch process, which has been going on for decades. It is not designed for filming.

And so I believe--this is my personal view, but I have done some consultation--that a film oversight committee could, with this Legislature's approval, be given the ability to issue special use permits in the Ag District that protect agriculture, protect public lands, but also can move very quickly.

Okay. But you're saying that it only applies to City and County of Honolulu?

No. No. 205 applies to all four counties.

All counties.

Oh, okay. So there should be no problem?

There will always be a problem.

We've been through it before, but we've had examples of going before Hawaii County, in fact, regarding-- oh, it was about several years ago, but that was something that even the county was trying to work in their planning department to help facilitate. I think there's a lot of positive things in this measure that we could work with to be able to help the counties because, as we know, they have the majority of the beautiful lands that producers want.

Well, the issue is, the counties were supposed to address all of their zoning requirements, but I-- Mary Alice, what act was that? In changing all of the general plans to see fit. So I assume that many of the counties have not done that as well and probably behind, but for something like this film industry and, you know, the intentions, the Legislature has always supported the film industry as well.

So I think maybe it's about time, Mary Alice, that we perhaps look at the situation finally and come up with a statute that would apply statewide. Then, you know, we won't have these issues come up independently of bills and services. And I think that's the question that our chair from EDT, you know, is-- you know, and I tend to agree with her with all the questions that are being asked as well.

But, you know, it's long overdue. I'm-- film industry-- I was in the hotel business for 20-something years 40 years ago, and we had industries coming into Big Island. However, but it still seems like we don't have a statute that clearly defines-- and this is an important industry for our state. So, okay. Maybe we need to look at some future--like soon, Mary Alice--recommendation to make some changes.

Senator, thank you very much. You have-- currently in the bill, you have the Director of the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, along with DBEDT, DLNR, and another on the Oversight Committee so that as long as that stays in the bill and the bill moves forward for further discussion, then I can continue to offer--

Well, we shouldn't be doing statutes only for a certain island-- I mean, counties. You know, it should be, you know, something that should be statutorily for the state because the industry travels throughout our state and, you know, we need the industry, you know, to help us going further, but I think there's lots of work. Now, where are we on the-- our Hawaii State Plan that could address part of this issue?

The Hawaii State Plan-- thank you, Legislators. We're in our second year of collecting input. We're gonna put all the good suggestions that--a couple came in bills that you saw, green infrastructure and others--into a revised chapter that the Legislature can consider. We want to call out some of the things that have changed since the 70s, when that--

Yeah, but what plan? Because we had 12 functional plans. So, the changes would--with regards to this issue--would be under Agriculture, or where would you decide?

I'd put it in Economic Development.

Economic Development. Okay. I don't want to belabor this because there's lots of bills before us, but lots of work to do, Chair, and I agree with her, you know, the concerns-- the-- I mean, the questions that are raised. Thank you.

Thank you. Senator Fevella.

Sorry. And I think this bill is great, and I guess not everybody understanding, and Georja know we know because Hawaii Island is one of the difficult places for filming on Ag. There's so much hoops and loops to get through, so something like this will help streamline.

But while we don't have as much because we do film in a lot of areas, but a lot of the neighbor islands, for whatever reason, the county just be, I guess, the watcher of the gate. So something like this would really help the film industry with the neighbor islands. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, chair. Any other questions? Thank you. Seeing none, moving on to Senate bill 3,085 relating to the Hawaii film studio. First up, Georgia Skinner, say it.

Standard testimony and support really helps us to build out the full package that the legislature is also proposing to help, make our film industry more competitive. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Lauren Yasaka for Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Good afternoon. We've had our municipal support.

Thank you. Next up, Director, Business Economic Development in support. Thank you. Our next up, Irish Barber on Zoom, stop driving Irish before you get to an accident.

I have you on Bluetooth. Aloha chair, vice chairs, and, members of the committees. We stand on our written testimony and support and for allowing us to testify.

I wouldn't accept her. Right? Nick next up, Angela Young.

You know what she can do?

Angela Melody Young in strong favor, of this legislation. So, if DLNR specialty is not business management and filmmaking, then it should let DPED help manage these aspects of growth in the filmmaking industry with no need for land board approval for new tenants to utilize the studio. But DLNR can provide advice about appropriate use and inappropriate use and the impact of filmmaking activities to be conducted on DLNR properties to protect from damage and to advise on native Hawaiian cultural practices.

So that activities conducted does not physically degrade the land and infrastructure.

And, so, you know, actually, you know, Barbie. Barbie was not filmed on a farm, although in the movie, it looks like it's filmed on a farm. It was actually filmed in a studio in The United Kingdom. So when you have more studios, you have more television shows, movies, and you have thriving families and middle class people who have jobs. So policies should empower the filmmakers industry's voice to foster authentic representation and to help with storytelling to build active and elusive

networks. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you.

So we have seven other people in support of this measure. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none members, any questions? Quick question for DLNR, please. So do you see any problems with granting this exemption so debate can streamline its use of the film studio?

No. We don't often, I think, enter into these agreements when we have to let them. They're, like, kind of few and far in between, and it takes burden off the staff, to to be honest. And we're fine with the film studio doing so. Okay.

Thank you. Okay. Moving on, Senate Bill 3169 relating to coastal resilience. First up, Michael King testifying for Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Good afternoon chairs, committee members. I just want to add a little bit to the testimony or I want to parcel it out. We have zero concerns with DBEDT taking the lead and doing the planning and coordination to respond to the erosion at Montek Fuji Bay. Zero concerns. Our issues are that we understand a long range plan is being developed, and this bill would excuse it from all environmental regulation, conservation easterpiece permits, and SMA permits as written.

And I we oppose that. Without even seeing the plan, we don't think we can excuse it from all these permits. We had a robust discussion on the companion bill on the house. We compromise reached on page six, line two. Rep Hashem changed the word shall to the program may be exempt.

I'd rather have that whole section deleted, but I was able to live with that compromise. So I wanted to share that with the committee. Thank

you. Next up, Mary Alice Evans from Department of Planning and Sustainable Development.

Chairs and members, I'm Mary Alice Evans with the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. We support the bill and we are we strongly support a regional shoreline management approach to these threatened areas. We think that headland to headland is the appropriate way to look at shoreline protection. So, we're willing to support DBEAT on this.

And thank you. Thank you, Mayor Ellis. Next up, Noheilani'u Hajioun's council member in support. Yukile Sugimura Council member of Maui also in support. Kathleen Murayama on Zoom with Matokuji Sotto Zen Machine.

Go ahead.

I'm cathleen Murayama of Paya Matokuji Sotto Zen Mission's administrative board, and I wanna add further emphasis to Matukuji's call for assistance and support. In the past year, a computer science teacher from Maui High School and a handful of his students have been conducting drone observations and collected data on the shoreline erosion at Montefucchi Bay. They have completed three observations.

And after the their latest visit in January, one of the students emailed the board president and asked whether we we actually excavated the portion of the shoreline stolen, noticeably be missing. He had to explain that the damage was all due to the way winter waves.

The scope and scale of damage is significant, and the rapid progression of erosion as witnessed by the high school student can seem unbelievable, but it's very real. Paya Matapuji has spent about ten years and close to a million dollars to implement a temporary emergency solution. We humbly offer, humbly ask, we stand on our written testimony and we ask for your support of Senate bill 3169. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Patrick Sullivan in support with OCEANET, Douglas Miller, League of Women Voters in opposition, Eric Motto for Mpaea Matukuji So to's admission in support. Roberta Arita testifying, for Monte Kuji So to as well in support. And then Cindy Freitas in opposition and Scott Warden in opposition.

Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? I'll see none members. Any questions? Mary Adams, please. Senator Inouye.

Thank you. We've had several bills this year and in most recent discussions about, the same issue with regards to sea level rise and all the other crisis. So such as, the issue on Maui, I think we've dealt, dealt with this, as well. So, and I think we've made decisions on other bills. How does this one different from that?

This is a pilot project that's an opportunity, as I see it, to put our, the adaptation pathways approach, which is a DLNR and OPSD and CZM approach for regional management and practice. Our CCM staff has gone and looked at the bay. It is severely threatened and needs to have and the landowner needs help. And this is not we're not looking at a for profit, resort community. We're looking at a cultural icon that, you know, should be protected.

And so, OPSD will help DBEDT with all of the the planning, approach, look for federal funds, look for any sources of, revenue. So I see it as a pilot project. But I do think the concept of of regional shoreline adaptation is one that we're going to need to move forward with because we can't continue to deal with these on a TMK by TMK basis because the ocean doesn't work that way.

Well, it's just kind of concerning because we had issues with regards to our what was that issue on Maui, the number of or just recently? Anyway, there are It's been an ongoing, plans and issues for the last two years, more so with bills. And we just heard one recently. I'm just wondering, we're designating this particular bill, Montokuji Bay, but what about the others that we have been dealing with on Maui for the last several years? That's just my concern.

And this is a pilot project, but then all the other ones that came before our committees has already been, I mean, the issues are the same. So I'm wondering if there's a conflict or how can you do a study with only one bay? I mean, I have no problem. I can see the urgency for this particular bay. Bay.

So Senator Inouye, what we're gonna try and look at as we look at this bill, and then you guys had discussion yesterday with Waterland. Jen and I have

had discussions on how do we look at several of these bays to come up with a solution to try and address not just this one, which is why we've been talking directly with, you know, the different entities that have been working on it. It's been a problem, and it has been that has had this problem with the deterioration.

Thank you.

Thank you. Senator. Any other questions? Seeing none, I'm going to turn this over to my good looking chair from Waterland.

But not as good looking as good looking as the chair from development.

Thank you. Let's move on to the next measure, which is Senate Bill 2001 relating to the Banyan Drive Community Development District, which establishes the Banyan Drive Community Development District special fund. Testifying first on SB 2001 is the mayor of Big Island, I'm sorry.

HTA signed up. My apologies. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Thank you. Next is office of Hawaiian affairs on Zoom.

Aloha chair, vice chairs, and members of the committees. I'm Sharde Freitas, public policy advocate with the office of Hawaiian affairs out of our Hilo office. We We stand on our written testimony and I will also highlight key points as provided in our comment. Much of the district consists of ceded lands and OHA has long sought to ensure that the state does not alienate competed land, that it maintains these lands to ensure Corpus's viability and availability for the future.

We appreciate and recognize the importance of the cultural specialists and also recommend the inclusion of a lineal descendant member as done in HB 2616, honor this place and redevelop in a way that acknowledges the history in a more balanced, restorative and responsive to community well-being.

OHA recommends being included as a member of the Banyan Drive Redevelopment Agency and for the governor to appoint the portrait of specialists and lineal descendant members after consulting with OHA and considering our recommendation. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Up next, also on zoom, Waiho'ola Nui Laau Lapaau Foundation.

Aloha. Mahalo for having, me testify in, opposition to SB 2001. We oppose this in regards to the specifics that it's not including lineal descendants at this time. We also wanna recommend that including the lineal descendants on top of the authority, is essential to what the initiative was when we proposed our, support for HB 2616.

And I think that needs to be very clear that lineal descendants do support 2616, which is not you know, this is 2001, but it's also related because now recommendations from all the same parties are going back into this bill.

So we would appreciate that you folks recognize that we would like to be a voting member, not part of an advisory group. And, I think if we can do this as a Lahui and community to recognize our voices, we would greatly appreciate that for our kupuna. Mahalo.

Thank you. Signed up next is also on Zoom, James McCully.

Thank you very much, chair Lee, Chair Duque. I'd like to recognize Vice Chair Lorraine Inouye for her long time commitment to the improvement of Banyan Drive. I'm the chair of the Hawaii Banyan Drive, Hawaii Redevelopment Agency, but I'm testifying today in my personal capacity. I'll stand on my testimony, but I would like to, give a special notice to chair Don Chang.

Aloha to her and I hope for her recovery and her department's willingness to work with HCDA, the legislature, to support Banyan Drive's redevelopment, was a significant change in policy.

And I appreciate acting chair Kanakkale's ongoing support for, Banyan Drive's development or redevelopment in a community driven way. Thank you very much, and I'm able to take questions should it come. Thank you.

Thank you. Also on Zoom, Nathan Gaddes.

Yes. Announcement. Yeah. You are. Good job. Yeah. Yeah. Aloha.

I'm Nate Gaddis. I'm referred to as Nate. I also serve on the Banyan Drive Hawaii redevelopment agency as vice chair, but I'm also here in a personal capacity. I'll stand on my written testimony, but I'd also just wanna kinda comment on that very briefly. There's, you know, some differences between the house version, obviously, in the Senate version, both in govern governance and in some mechanisms and protections.

But we'd like to see this move forward, so the process can move forward and so that any tweaks can be ironed out between them. You know, a lot of people put blood, sweat, and tears into this that aren't even here with us today. And it's high time this, move forward in a positive direction. So expressing support. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify on SB 2001. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure?

Seeing none, are there any questions?

Yes. HCTA. Just briefly, can you tell us your new recommendation for amendment?

So good afternoon, senators. So I have really kind of three amendments. One has to do with simplification of the name to, Waiakea. The other is to do kind of a structural change, which is on, you know, page four lines, page three lines four to 13. It was kind of a drafting error that came down from the drafting agency.

So we're suggesting that it it be removed. There was some references to the Banyan Drive redevelopment agency. Those should be replaced with the Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency, the agency that Mr McCully is on. And finally, I think to address the concerns raised, I would suggest that, lineal and cultural descendants be on an advisory council. Now I I realize that, it's an advisory council.

But I think this advisory council, along with other community members will be an invaluable, you know, resource to the board. At the same time, to expand on that, Senator, as you know, we are undergoing a master planning effort for Waiakea Peninsula. We had received, $1,000,000 from the late representative Nakashima. So we're undergoing that master planning process. We are gonna, assemble a community advisory committee.

That will help us, plan to the planning and visioning for the district. I would suggest that that kind of role for cultural, Linear descendants and other community members is really the heavy lift that's gonna occur with the planning because they will look at uses in the Waiakea Peninsula. They will look at different land uses.

And once that master plan and rules are done, it will become the plan for development for the agency for why I care Peninsula for many, many years to come, and that's really the heavy lift and where I think they can have impactful. Participation in in in the in the planning process and in what goes on, development wise and then also called cultural resources for the district.

So that's in a nutshell. Senator, the suggested changes we're asking for.

Just a question and several concerns, and it was brought up at the chambers as well. When you look at Waiakea Peninsula, it's a bigger picture other than Banyan Drive. The concern that many in the business community and those that are interested in developing Banyan Drive is foremost. And so when you look at Waiakea, the peninsulas you talk about, right next door is a county. So you've got the you've got the the gardens, you've got the, coconut island that belongs to, the county.

And then you have Hilo Hawaiian and the rest of the land use, land use that is under DLNR. So that's, that's a big picture when you talk about the White Cape Peninsula. So with that said, knowing that we're in an urgency to get Banyan Drive up and running soon, where are you with the million dollar and the community input? What's the schedule so that we can start to move.

And when are you going to do the RFPs once we develop, once we have the issue on another bill, we have taking back the, the golf course from the Naniloa's properties.

Okay. Senator, I'll just take it one step at a time. Okay. Right now, I'm focused on trying to get Banyan Drive or Waiakea Peninsula established as a district. That's our first thing.

Normally when we do a district like this, we would start develop the district and then we would start the master planning process. But because the master planning money was appropriated, you know, couple a year and a half or so ago. We wanted to make sure we got to use that money before it lapsed. So where we are in the master planning process is, come this summer, maybe June or July, We're gonna stand up that community advisory committee that I just spoke about.

That's gonna have representation from cultural lineal descendants from other people in the community.

That's gonna help us shape the vision for the Peninsula. Then later in the summer, we're going to hold, of community visioning exercise where, we're gonna Our consultants are going to present all the data that they've learned about utilities for the district. The possible infrastructure that's needed, other kinds of information and then have the community kind of present their vision for the district. So that's where we are, Senator, you know, very not, you know, nutshell. And I always like to talk about what is the end result.

The end result is we're gonna come up with a community master plan that hopefully I say hopefully reflects the vision and the voices of the community in that they have in Waiakea Peninsula. And the reason for the name Waiakea is, it's place name for that whole area, And it's not just Banyan Drive because Banyan Drive is just one part of it, but it's that whole peninsula, including Coconut Island, and which is which is integral to the area. So thank you, Senator.

It's just a concern that that we have because several things that hopefully doesn't interfere with what's planning because we have several bills. Number one, take the golf course back within the Banyan Drive. We're asking for $15,000,000 to demolish the country club on Banyan Drive. And just just a matter of where we are today and hopefully there's no stall as you already heard some some from some members of the chamber that was just recently said to move this along. But it it it's just a concern we have, but that's it for now, madam chair and mister chair.

Yep. Thank you. Senator Favella?

Yes. My my question is with the the new descendants in the culture. Why why would it be an issue to have them on the board? Again, this is another reason why, again, a lot of our people have issues. Government wants to supersede the whole issue and say, hey. These guys have deep roots generation of that area. They left off a generation.

You heard the other guy said this on the board. Oh, plenty people. Right? You just said about the other person that was there a long time. Try to plan this. Again, excluding the main people and a vested interest. I'm not talking about money wise. I'm talking about cultural wise. Every time we put the money before culture, that's a that's a issue I have. And the whole issue about trying to cut everything up and do everything like that, putting a a cart before the horse, that that is not acceptable.

So I don't know where you feel where you feel because you're saying these amendments. Where you feel that it's okay to supercede the Hawaiian people by making him an advisory board. You see what I'm saying? I I continue to do that, especially on that island. So you I know you know the people that is involved.

You know their energy. You know their heritage. You know the whole thing about their family being relocated and moved out of the area because of development. And all they wanted was a seat at the table, and then you tell them, no. No.

That's okay. We're not gonna do the house bill. We're gonna make you guys an advisory board because, you know, you get Patty say, but they don't have a vote.

Senator, you know, I don't think this, this the Waiakea Peninsula is all about money. I think the primary focus when

I didn't say you just say in the overview.

Okay Sorry. So I think I'm not trying to put the cart before the horse. When I talk about the planning coming first. It was just because we had the money appropriated to us, and I needed to start doing that planning right away.

And then now the bill is coming working its way through the Legislature, so we just needed to do the planning a little bit ahead of the establishment of district just because of the money, the funds that we have available right now. I didn't wanna lose it is what I'm saying.

Yeah. So no. I'm not talking about you in general, sir. I know you're in the seat. I'm just speaking what I'm trying to explain that.

My whole issue is not about all the other stuff. My issue is, again, government is telling the people, you can be on an advisory board because you will say everything. But at the end of the day, a board still here could vote. Yes or no in the advisory from the kind the the community. So if the community tell you they don't wanna rebuild that hotel, then we're breaking down.

We don't want it there. We want it to be access to the beach. We wanna have it usage for the community. You guys would be good with that? No.

If you guys gonna build a hotel, and we're gonna spend money to break down one hotel that the other person that I even give nothing back, we're gonna bring that back them down, have somebody come in, another commercial person will come in. Or it's a safety zone for our community and our community members.

Senator Fevella, you know, with respect to country club and the demolition of that hotel, that's really far from what it it the plan envisions or at least some initial plans. We're actually thinking that country, country club and next door to it is the Uncle Billy's Lot parcel that was recently destroyed. Yep. There's other hotels around there or con former condominium hotels there around that area. We're actually envisioning that area to be open space and park space, in addition to other uses, but park space.

Because one of the things that is gonna happen with sea level rise is plate certain places on that peninsula are gonna be subject to more sea level rise than others, and it could be some of the parks like Liliuokalani Gardens. So to make up for sea level rise, and I know not everybody believes in sea level rise, but it's a reality. So I think for uncle Billy's, for country club where we there's a bill to demolish it.

Actually, the vision is to do some kind of open space and some kind of park that can also serve as a buffer for sea level rise, for that district. So I don't think anything has been set in stone in the planning.

That's what I want the community master planning to bring forward from people, senetor.

Thank you. I'll just note, just for the clock, should the measure move forward, we'll get to see it again in the ways and means committee and have further questions.

Thank you senators.

Anyone else? All right. Seeing none. Thank you everyone. Let's move on to the next measure.

Appreciate it.

SB 2599 relating to development which redesignates the Stadium Development District as the Halawa Community Development District And makes related amendments. And first up on 2599 is HCDA.

. Thank you. Next is Stadium Authority.

Stand up

Thank you, chair. Thank you, chair. Decoyt as well. Mikey Dowell from the Stadium authority. This and the measure afterward.

We stand on our written comments, or we stand on our written testimony and support. We welcome the opportunity to codify and to strengthen our relationship with a HCDA. We would like to note, however, for both this and the bill afterward. That there are some issues in that the city authority has sold jurisdiction currently over the entire development of the 98.5 acres. That has to that has changed.

Should this relationship move forward in this manner, and also, we do believe very strongly that we currently have a relationship with the city administration that we can move forward on infrastructure permitting that we have the things in place necessary to get a vibrant community and a vibrant district in the upcoming years. And that this HCDA model would serve as a backup, to that that we can move forward as currently constituted. Thank you.

Thank you. That's everyone who testified on this measure. Is there anyone else?

Aloha, Angela Melody. I'm testifying on behalf of CARES.

In strong favor of this legislation, so I don't know about the competing interests to manage Aloha Stadium District, but I can provide a proposed amendment, so which is that the committee, the committees should consider work group to Invite University of Hawaii, invite the county's office of DPP who is experienced in transit oriented development zones and can assist with, the planning because Oahu general plan already anticipates University of Hawaii and the train, and that's, you know, a development zone within, the Aloha Stadium District.

And so the counties can also provide clarification about, the complex transit oriented development zoning standards. And so, you know, making minor or major adjustments in the powers of these authorities are central to the new Aloha Stadium Entertainment District project.

And to streamline the complex process from a single state run stadium to a co management of a 98 acre. Mixed use community with the initiation of the demolition of the dismantling of the original stadium to be completed by mid twenty twenty six. It's a lot, so the committee should anticipate working with the counties. Thank you.

Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure? Seeing none, other questions? Seeing none. All right. Let's move on to the next measure.

SB 2604 relating to the stadium development district, which appropriates funds, for the planning design development of the Stadium District by HCDA contingent upon stadium authority submitting a report that includes various documentation. Testifying first is HCDA.

Good afternoon. Stand on within testimony for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next on Zoom is the attorney general.

Not on Zoom chair.

In person.

Good afternoon. Deputy attorney general Kevin Tong with comments. We have concerns that certain provisions of this bill conflicts with the state of authority sole jurisdiction as raised by Mike Yudao. We recommended certain amendments or changes in our written testimony depending on the intent of the legislature. I'm available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Finally, stadium authority again.

Thank you, Charlie. Thank you, Senator DeCoite. Mike Gidowell, law of state authority executive director. I don't wanna sound like a broken record, but but essentially, it's similar to the previous and that we welcome the opportunity to work with HCDA. However, we believe that as currently constituted, the same authority has sole jurisdiction over the 98.5 acres and that as currently constituted, we can move forward.

But again, we welcome HCDA involvement and we welcome the opportunity to move forward as a partnership.

Thank you. Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else on SB 2604? Seeing none, are there any questions?

Quick question. Mike. So, you know, like, with this bill in the form and the prior bill we just heard, your outreach within community and other partners, say, and so forth, that has been engaged with. Correct?

Yes, sir.

Okay. I just wanted to make sure that that has occurred. You know, we have people that testify and sometimes try to kind of read the bill too far into it. I want them to be reassured that these partners have been involved from the beginning. My other question is that involvement within the county, and I believe the mayor had said that. Do you have full support on behalf of the mayor and the county?

First to your previous question, absolutely, Senator. The community can be assured that all stakeholders have been engaged. For instance, at our recent stadium, authority district office blessing and the dismantling or the beginning of dismantling of the current stadium. All stakeholders and parties were invited and participated, including the University of Hawaii, who played a prominent role and who is a big part of our development moving forward. On your questions with the county, Senator, you heard from the mayor himself.

The mayor has been on record and has said privately that he is in full support at the current administration and several members of the council, have also indicated their full support and expediting permitting and helping us to move forward in infrastructure spending. And I also wanna make note that, our current agreements have all infrastructure being dedicatable to the city.

We want to ensure that this is a plug and play so that anything that we develop, we can incur we can get city support and be dedicatable so that they take care of the sewage and the water and the things of that nature. We don't wanna take on that responsibility as a state state agency. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Question. Wait. Senator.

Any of the sewer capacity information that we've been asking leadership prior to yourself?

Absolutely, Senator. So so this is where we are with that information. We have received emails and verbal indication of where we need to be on housing capacity. Keeping it in that 4500 number of 4500 number. We have now submitted formalized letters to both the border water supply and E and V so that we can get a formalized report back that justifies that number.

And both have been responsive thus far and intend on getting it to us as soon as possible. I would like to kind of draw the underline that all consultants on whether it was RLCO or others have indicated that given the demands of the stadium itself will have the mixed use retail and the potential other developments have that the housing number is pretty firm in that 45, 4,500 housing units.

Okay. So you basically have a kinda unofficial rough number.

We have an unofficial rough number, but we are codifying that with official responses from E and V and the Board of Water Supply.

Okay. Thank you. And then, one more question, please. The bill, specifies that, funding will not be released until the stadium authority has a project readiness plan. How long do you think that that's gonna take for you guys to do? Because there's no deadline on the bill or no time frame on the bill. So I guess it comes down to you guys on when you guys have the plan, then we move to the next step. How long is that gonna take you guys?

So so the the way that I can answer this, Senator, and and please forgive me. I'm gonna I'm gonna dance around just a little bit, so forgive me in advance. All construction projects have multiple contracts that govern them. There's no one contract that governs at all. On the stadium site, we've had five or four depending on how you count the last two.

Two of them were the stadium specific, and those have already been settled and executed as of September of last year. Recently, as of the day of the blessing itself, we reached a tentative agreement on the master development agreement, which is a tentative on the development that surrounds the stadium. What will be there? How will it be there? Who pays what?

The reason it's tentative is because the lawyers are finalizing the language. We literally reached that agreement that morning of the blessing. And then lastly, it's gonna be the ground lease or infrastructure type on the rest of the development, and that's what we're currently negotiating. We expect to finish that by mid March. Therefore, we are we feel that we are progressing in a manner in which we do not need this kind of involvement from H C D A.

That being said, we welcome it as a backup. Should we lose support or should another administration feel differently about our project or should any other thing happen that we need to keep moving? So I guess to answer your question is we expect to be done with our contracts very shortly that will allow us to move as full partners with Aloha with HDP.

Yeah. And I understand your pushback a little bit with having oversight from HCD and DIGS. However and you're the new guy coming in, but prior to you, there were leadership that was kind of sitting on things. So I think that if we can assure the legislature that all people are working together, accountability is at the forefront, making sure that things move along will help to get you the funds sooner rather than later.

And my last point that I'll make is that right now, the funds appropriate for 48,000,000 ish dollars.

49.5. 49.5. I'm sorry. I gotta be specific because I need it.

And and, you know, the reason why we wanna expedite the readiness proposal is because if it the longer it goes, the more money that's gonna be needed. So I just wanted to mention that. But But thank you very much, Mike. Thank you, Chair.

No, thank you so much, Senator. Chair.

Thank you. Other questions? Seeing none. All right. Did someone want to ask the director a question?

Follow-up after. Okay. Yeah. Take a quick recess.

We are EDT and Waterland is decision making on today's agenda. First off, SB 2156 relating to land use. Recommendation is to pass with an SD one by incorporating the amendments recommended by the bed and the recommendations from OSPD making any necessary technical and non substantive changes and defecting the effective date to 07/01/2050. Members, any questions? I mean, discussion?

Sorry, Vice Chair Wakai for the vote,

chair votes aye.

I vote yes. Senator Kim? Aye. Senator Fevella? Aye.

Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you.

Thank Committee on Waterland, same recommendation.

Chair's recommendation of the Committee on Waterland, Culture and the Arts on SB 2156 is to pass with amendments. Chair Lee. Aye. Vice Chair goes aye. Senator Chang.

Aye. Senator Lamosau. Aye. And Senator Decor. Aye.

aye

ask you is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Next up Senate Bill 3085, relating to Hawaii Film Studio. We are going to pass this with an SD 1 by defecting the effective date to July 1, 2050. Any discussion members? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Chair goes aye.

Noting the presence of all members. Any opposition or reservations to the Chair's recommendation? Seeing and hearing none, Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Thank you.

Thank you. Committee on Water Land, same recommendation.

Okay. Chair's recommendation on SB 3085 to pass with amendments with five members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Senate Bill 3169. I have been, in conversation with, Chair Lee in regards to coastal, coastal resilience, for not just, Mantokuji, which I have been a huge supporter of the Mantokuji Bay and preservation of that area due to, land degradation, and erosion. We are going to look at incorporating this along with Senate Bill 2401 that will help, move this project along faster, that my esteemed Chair has been working on and through faith in him to help us move this forward.

So in this case, I will be deferring Senate Bill 3169.

Thank you. I'll just add thanks to the Chair. As we know, we've had several shoreline erosion bills over the last week or so, all doing different things. So we're trying to consolidate and create a pathway that won't let this project or other things fall off. So I'll just say I've never been there, but it is clearly one of the most dire situations I think throughout the state.

So we wanna make sure that we can do it right and that conversation will continue.

So with that Senate Bill 3169 is deferred.

So move on to SB 2001 relating to Banyan Drive Community Development District. With two, similarly recommend. I'll just note we have three bills all relating to HCDD on this agenda, as well as some others we've considered. We'd like to move these on, but I'll just note, we are now just a few hours away from the deadline to file bills.

And so I know on this measure in particular, there were some comments from the community about changes, and some of the others, that we're not gonna have time to incorporate right now in this particular moment, but we'll note those for the next committee. And rest assured, we'll work with the stakeholders and community and others to make sure that, this is done right. So what we're gonna do is, actually combine these measures together, into the next bill.

So for the moment we'll be deferring SB 2001. So we'll go to SB 2599 relating to development. This is the first, Stadium HCDD bill. So this measure we'd like to move forward uses the vehicle for the other measures, here.

So, we'll incorporate, well, recognition to move this forward with amendments, incorporating the contents of SB 2001, which is the Canyon Drive measure we just spoke about, as well as the contents of SB 2604, which is the next measure on the agenda, and the contents of SB 3327, which this committee previously heard and passed out a few days ago, and then, just add in tech amendments and a defective date. And I'll note, you know, there are amendments and tweaks I think that some of the testifiers have rightly raised on some of these measures.

So, as we move forward between now and the next committee hearing, we're gonna work with the stakeholders to iron those out since we don't have time to actually dive into the substance and draft those amendments by the deadline, when we have to file in just a few hours. So, appreciate everyone's time today and rest assured we will continue the conversation. So, any comments or questions? If not, vice chair.

Okay. For the Committee on Water, Land.

Thank you, chair. Is, is it okay if I?

Yes.

So, chair, thank you for your work on this bill. I will be declaring a conflict for, for this measure because my husband is an engineer for one of the, the contractors for the Aloha Stadium, and I would ask that I be recused from voting from this measure this time. Thank you.

So noted and we'll do that.

Any other discussion? Seeing none.

[Roll Call]

Committee on Economic Development and Tourism, same recommendation. Vice chair for the vote, chair goes aye.

I know you guys are gonna make the amendment, but I never hear though what I had asked. You said if it's gonna be actually, actually into the committee notes on the lineal descendant.

Oh, yes.

My apologies. Right?

Sorry about that.

We, we talked about that. Yes. For the Banyan Drive bill per, I think, the discussion you had raised, Senator, we'll note that in the committee report.

Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

[Roll Call]

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