House Standing Committee on Finance

We are convening the House Committee on Finance. It is around 10am ish on Thursday, February 26, 2026. We're here in room 308 and we have a pretty full agenda today. And we have another one coming up at 2 and hopefully they don't run into each other. Everyone's on their best behavior.

Just some basic ground rules where you have a two minute, it's kind of like a soft two minute cap on individual testimony so that everyone has an opportunity, an equal opportunity to testify. And if you're on zoom, please stay muted unless you are called upon to testify.

And I think the rest of this is probably not that important, but that's like the important stuff stuff. Okay, we're going to get started with HB 1183 HD2.

First we have the Department of Human Resources Development and Support.

Good morning Chair, Vice Chair. Members of the Committee will stand on its written testimony and support. I'm available for any questions.

Thank you. We have Department of the Attorney General with comments on Zoom. zero in person.

Morning Chair, Members of the Committee. Lori Tanigawa, Deputy Attorney General the the Department submitted a written testimony which we flagged a potential subject title issue and I'm available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Department of Law Enforcement and support.

Morning Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. My name is Ernest Robello. I'm the Deputy Director for the Department of Law Enforcement. We in support of this bill and we have submitted written testimony. I just wanted to highlight that the DLE recognizes that the financial considerations are an important aspect of any legislation related to the retirement system.

However, this bill is important to the D for the purposes of recruitment of D administrators and hard to fill positions as well as other positions with the D that require outsourcing or resources that they have to come from a county agency or another law enforcement agency.

This allows us for the state to be able to recruit these types of personnel to be able to make an immediate impact for the Department. This also allows for continuity of the Department itself so we don't have constant turnover of administrators.

It also provides for fair and equitable benefit to the people that are working in these positions doing similar roles as our county counterparts such as the Police Department with regards to their retirement benefits. Thank you very much for this opportunity to be available for any questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Employees Retirement System with comments.

Good morning Mr. Chair. Madam Vice Chair. The board of trustees for the Employee Retirement System has not reviewed or taken a position on this bill, but Administration has submitted testimony with some recommended amendments for you to consider in the draft. They've been outlined on the second page of the testimony.

But specifically, we would recommend that you look at unifying the dates of the amendment to a future date, such as July 1, 2026 which would be the effective date for if you were to pass this bill, and then also adding a specific section that's also the verbiage has been provided in the testimony.

These all together would help eliminate some ambiguity, add clarity to how the statute would have to be effectuated. Thank you.

Thank you. That's all the written testimony that we received on this measure. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, Members, do we have any questions on this measure? Seeing none, we're going to move on to the next item on the agenda. HB 1656 HD1 relating to the indebtedness to the state.

We have the Department of Accounting and General Services with comments.

Chair, Vice Chair. We stand on our written testimony providing comments on this matter.

Thank you. Hawaii Government Employees Association and support.

Good morning. Chair, Vice Chair, Members, Nui Sebast for HGA. We're in strong support of this measure. This measure establishes a more lenient process. When an employee is overpaid by the state and put on a repayment plan, it's not the fault of the employee. When they're overpaid, the employee will pay the. Will pay the loan back.

But many of them just ask for a more lenient process. Thank you.

Thank you. We have United Public Workers, UPW in support.

On behalf of UPW Chair Leisure. We stand on our testimony and strong support.

Thank you. That's everybody who indicated they would be joining us today. Also comments from the state library system and comments from the County of Honolulu Budget and Fiscal Services and one organization in support. Is there anybody else in the room? Wishing to Testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions on HB 1656? Okay, moving on to the next item on our agenda. HB 1658 HD1 relating to collective bargaining.

Department of Human Resources development. In opposition.

Opposition. And I'll be available for any questions.

Thank you. We have HGEA in support.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members, Nui Sebast HGEA. We're in strong support of this measure. In 2024, the Legislature established and codified into law a repricing process.

This Bill, which we're in support of, is looking to amend part of that process, the arbitration process, to make the arbitration process more appropriate for repricing job classifications and also to streamline repricing of job classes within the State thank you.

UPW and support.

Chair, Vice Chair to fire on behalf of UPW. And we stand on our written testimony and strong support.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us. Also testimony and opposition from the county of Honolulu Department of Human Resources and the county of Hawaii Department of Human Resources as well as one other organization in support. Is there anybody else in the row wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, Members of the Committee, do we have any questions? All right, moving on to HB 1661 relating to cafeteria plans.

Okay. Department of Human Resources Development with comments. Thank you. We have a Tax foundation of Hawaii with comments on Zoom.

Morning Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation. We flagged a possible unconstitutional delegation issue and we have submit with our testimony a technical fix to solve that issue assuming that the policy remains as stated in the bill. I'd happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much for the opportunity.

Thank you. HGA in support.

Nui Sebast of HGA. We're in strong support of this measure. I just do want to note that we. There's currently a $650 difference in what the IRS prescribes for the Medical Flexible Spending Account plan versus what is within D Herd's administrative rules. Thank you.

Thank you. UPW in support.

Chair, Vice Chair Tuli Tafai on behalf of UPW. We stand in strong support on this measure.

Thank you Members. Also comments from the county of Honolulu Department of Human Resources. That's all the testimony we've received. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Great. Members, any questions on this measure? Sensing a pattern here. Okay, Next we have HB 1664 HD1 relating to the Hawaii Employer Union Health Benefits Trust Fund.

We have the State Procurement Office with comments on zoom.

Good morning Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Bonnie Kahakui, Administrator, State Procurement Office will stand on our written testimony. Provide inviting comments. Thank you.

Thank you. HGA in support.

Nui Sebast For HGA. We're in. We're in strong support of this, this measure. At times when our Members take approved work related travel when they. And they'll cover those costs with their own personal funds like their credit card or debit card.

And once they submit for reimbursement, we do consider sometimes the long wait time when they wait for that reimbursement. So we appreciate the intent of this measure as it kind of codifies a 30 day reimbursement timeline and also provides remedy if they don't be reimbursed within 30 days.

Thank you. And just for clarification, I did read out the wrong bill number. Yeah. So we are on HB 1663 HD1 relating to reimbursement of public officers and employees. Employees. But that was the right testimony for the wrong descriptions. Okay. Sorry. Go ahead.

And UPW in support.

Chair. Vice Chair to fight on behalf of UPW. We stand on a written testimony in strong support.

Thank you. Members, additional comments from the Hawaii State Public Library System and one other organization. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to Testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions on HB 1663?

No. Okay, we're moving on to HB 1664. This is relating to the Hawaii Employer Union Health Benefits Trust Fund.

Department of Budget and Finance in opposition. Department of Human Resources Development with comments.

DHRD will stand on its written testimony providing comments.

Thank you. HGA in support.

Nui Sebast for HGA. We're in strong support of this measure. I do just want to note that this current negotiable item lacks a dispute mechanism. We cannot proceed for HGA. We cannot proceed to interest arbitration over the employee employer splits for. For the UTF. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. UPW in support.

Tuli Tafai again we stand on a written testimony. Strong support.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us. Also Office of Collective Bargaining in opposition and two other organizations in support. Anybody else in the room wishing to Testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, questions for HB 1664 sign. Moving on to HB 1859 HD1 relating to workforce development.

First, we have DBEDT in support.

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, my name is Con Strau from DBEDT on behalf of Director James to DBEDT, we stand on the facilitate with Indian Support office.

Thank you. Department of Labor and Industrial Relations with comments.

Good morning, Chair Todd, Madam Vice Chair Takenouchi and Members of the Committee. I'm Jade Butai, Director of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations. We stand on our testimony appreciating the intent. Workforce development is truly a shared responsibility and a team effort.

Each of us play an essential role and our success depends on all of us working in alignment. At DLIR, we rely on the support, collaboration and partnership of stakeholders to fulfill our responsibility. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. University of Hawaii in support.

Fellow Head Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, my name is Christine, University of Hawaii System Director of Workforce Development. We stand on our testimony and very strong support of this measure. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Holomua Collaborative and support.

Chair Vice Chair Members of the Committee My name is Matt Pearlberg. I work with Holomua Collaborative, a local nonprofit founded to advocate for policies to make sure that Hawaii can stay affordable for all working families to make sure they do not have to move to Continent.

Every year, Honolulu does a survey of local residents to best understand what is affecting the cost of living and the primary driver of affordability in Hawaii. And this year A survey of 3,200 local residents found the number two issue facing affordability in Hawaii is issues relating to wages. The cost of living floor in Hawaii is very high.

There's a certain point where we're not going to be able to get past just prices for the cost of living. But unfortunately the opportunity ceiling is too low and we need to have more opportunities for for folks to achieve the high cost of living that it is that we face in Hawaii.

This bill is an opportunity to raise that ceiling that we have is too low for opportunity. There's a lot of great workforce development efforts that are taking place in the state right now through DLIR, through DBEDT, the UH system, Hawaii P20 and a variety of nonprofits. And this their efforts have really improved over the past decade.

And this bill is an opportunity to align them further and make them work even better together.

By bringing in the generational commitment and requiring a long term goal, we can allow the facilitation of alignment between all of the workforce development efforts in the state and make sure that we are working together, not duplicating efforts and making it so folks can afford to stay in Hawaii.

I'm here and available to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you Hawaii Community Foundation and Support.

Foundation on behalf of Terry George, we staff and I with your testimony and support, thank you.

Hawaii Workforce Funders Collaborative in Support.

Chair Vice Chair Members of the Committee My name is Matt Stevens. I'm the Executive Director of the Hawaii Workforce Funders Collaborative and the co convener of the Learn Work Thrive Hui Across Sector Community Driven Initiative to promote Hawaii's generational workforce commitment. We stand in support of our strong support of written testimony in support of this bill.

And I'd like to expand on a couple of points. You know this bill matters because workforce challenges are fundamentally tied to our economic development challenges in the state. Recently, UHERO released a report that confirms what our workforce data has shown for years.

Even after adjusting for cost of living, Hawaii's wages and purchasing power rank among the weakest in the country. And we simply don't have enough living wage jobs to support the 170,000 young people who will enter our workforce over the next decade.

Current projections show that we're on pace to just create just over 1001,000 living wage jobs over that time period. Addressing this persistent structural challenge will require coordination of three interrelated lines of work. First, ensuring clear pathways to the living wage jobs that we know about today.

Two, growing our economy to create more living wage jobs consistent with the kind of recommendations Shahir opens forth. And third, improving job quality in Hawaii. A quality job is one that allows someone to remain here to fulfill commitments to family and community and to maintain physical and mental health.

If our economy cannot provide prospect for those types of jobs, we should not be surprised when people are forced to make the difficult decision to leave. These are complex challenges and they require durable interagency coordination. Most importantly, HB 1859 does not create a new program or mandate new spending.

It strengthens the coordination and accountability within our existing workforce planning. And I'll make one final observation. When you see our the testimony submitted today, you'll see higher education leaders, business leaders, healthcare providers, community advocates and public agencies all describing this Bill through their own lens.

A common language and a common narrative for how we untangle this persistent workforce. Challenge is starting to emerge. And that doesn't happen by accident. It happens when stakeholders align around a shared long term goal and alignment improves the effectiveness of investments already being made in workforce development.

HB 1859 provides the durable public infrastructure to hold alignment over time. And for these reasons, I respectfully urge your support for this bill.

Thank you.

Thank you Members.

That's everybody who indicated they'd be joining us. Also comments from the Department of Human Services, support from the county of Honolulu Office of Economic Revitalization and the Hawaii State Community Commission on the Status of Women as well as 12 other individual or organizations. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions on this measure? HB 1859? No.

Okay.

Next, moving on to HB 2116 HD2 relating to grants.

Of the Department of Labor Industrial Relations, Office of Community Services and Support.

Morning Chair, Vice Chair. Ray Domingo, Executive Director, Office of Community Services. I stand in support submitting testimony in this measure which will assist vulnerable populations who could potentially lose or have their benefit as benefits at risk. I'm available question, Available questions. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Catholic Charities Hawaii in support on Zoom.

Aloha Chair Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm Betty Lou Larson with Catholic Charities Hawaii. We really thank you for looking at this issue. This is going to the new federal regulations are going to make a lot of people very hungry and have no medical, medical care. These situations can be proactively addressed.

And we thank you for watching this bill and looking at this bill for that. We feel that nonprofits would, which are, which would provide grants in this Bill are really the way to go because they have the trust of the community, they know how to reach hard to reach communities Members.

They're all across the state and they have the capacity to quickly scale up to offer not only volunteer activities, but to link people to volunteer activities, trainings and other things they may need, especially civic engagement, which is very hard to do on your own.

Often people are not unwilling, they just don't know how, they don't know where to go. And this will really help with that process. We feel this is really important.

It's a very practical solution to be proactive to help people engage in the community so that they can meet the requirements and this would be critical to their health, their safety and their family stability. So we thank you so much for looking at this bill and offering this opportunity to testify. Thank you.

Thank you Hawaii Community Foundation and support.

ABC NOA is standing in for Terry George from Hawaii Community foundation to stand on our testimony and support model.

Thank you. Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks and support on Zoom.

I'm actually here in person. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of Committee, Nicole Wu, thank you for hearing this bill.

Chair. Like Betty Lou said, this is a very important way to make sure that folks don't fall through the gaps with the much stricter federal rules for Medicaid and staff and other programs. So again, thank you for hearing this bill and its passive.

Thank you. Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

Hello Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. I'm Chris Cockle from Hawaii Public Health Institute. As you've already heard, this addresses the adverse impacts of HR1, which creates a whole bunch of new workforce requirements with regard to SNAP and Medicaid will have a tremendous impact on our community.

Just to be clear about what some of those impacts are, the new eligibility requirements are conditioned on documenting up to 80 hours per month work, education, training or community service for many adults. And of course if they can't do that, then their coverage would be at risk.

The law also raises the age threshold for mandatory work participation to 64 reduced or eliminated exemptions for vulnerable populations, including immigrants, the houseless population, and shift a lot of new burdens and cost burdens to the states. There's some data coming from the Department of Human Services that is relevant to this with regard to snap.

According to DHS, for our state SNAP enrollees, this could impact up to 16,000 individuals age 55 to 64 and 10,000 households with a dependent child age 14 and older. So we think this is a great idea. Nonprofits have the capacity to provide help.

They want to provide help and this will empower them to provide a lot of assistance to their communities in the time of need. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We have Aloha Care in support on Zoom. Not present. Not present. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us. Also testimony, support from five other organizations. Anybody else in the room wishing to Testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, Members, any questions on HB2116? Next. Someone's gonna break the Ayes. We'll figure it out. HB2271HD1. Making emergency appropriations for public employment clock titles.

We have the Department of Budget and Finance and support.

Sabrina Nasir, Deputy Director. We stand on our written testimony and support. Thank you.

Thank you. Department of Hawaiian Homelands in support. Not present. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation in support. Not present. Department of Accounting and General Services in support.

Chair, we stand on our written testimony in support of this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii Public Housing Authority and support stands on its testimony and support. Thank you. Office of Youth Services in support.

Office of Services stands on our written testimony and support.

Thank you. UPW in support.

UPW, we send this morning support.

Thank you. That's everybody who indicated they'd be joining us. Also testimony and support from the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, the Department of Land and Natural Resources and the University of Hawaii. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to Testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions? No? Okay. HB2276HD1 relating to the Hawaii Employer Union, Health Benefits Trust Fund Investment Office staff salaries.

We have EUTF in support.

Good morning. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. ATF stands on it's pretentious testimony and support.

Thank you.

That's all the testimony we received for this measure. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, any questions?

No.

Moving on to HB2335 HD1 relating to workforce development.

We have the Department of Transportation and support on Zoom.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee Attend le Deputy Director for the JLTV standard. A written testimony and strong support. And I'm here for any questions.

Thank you. Department of Education with comments. Not present. Department of Human Resources Development with comments.

Be here to stand on its written testimony providing comments among available for your questions.

Thank you, Members. Also testimony and support from the Hawaii State Commission on the status of Women. That's all the testimony we've received. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

All right, could the Department of Transportation come up real quick? I feel like someone's got to do something. I don't want to create a culture of silence. You know, I have a very hard hitting question.

I was wondering if you could maybe share a little bit about the strides you guys have been making with your internship program, what that result has looked like and what this legislation would mean for that program and potentially scaling it up.

Absolutely. Thank you, Chair. So last summer we began our inaugural cohort summer intern cohort. We onboarded about 114from student helper twos all the way to intern twos. What we did was we identified projects and mentors for the students to work on. And so for about six to eight weeks they worked on this project.

Their project, it was design projects, construction projects. I think was our 100 year anniversary of Aloha Tower. And it all culminated into an end of the summer presentation for each mode. So admin. Airports, harbors and highways.

Their interns all went through their internal pitch it to the Deputy Director and then went on to the presentation with the Governor, some representatives as well as Senators judging their presentation. Since that summer, we've onboarded, I believe, at least nine of these interns.

What this bill will do is if an intern has worked for a Department for 480 hours or three months, then we can open up an internal vacancy announcement and they could compete. They will compete, albeit a smaller pool than the General public. But they do compete for the position.

And that allows us and the intern to really have a job lined up for when they graduate. You know, I think in the past we would have to tell the intern to get on the list with t herd and then we would kind of wait for a list.

So this just really provides a pathway, I think sooner so that an intern has the job lined up and the public agency can compete with private and other federal entities on having this intern work for them.

Great. Thank you, Members, any questions for the Department? Okay. If not, just thank you for all the work you guys are doing in that. I had the pleasure of sitting through those presentations last year and it was remarkable. And I think it's a real creative way to try and approach some of the workforce development issues we have.

So I just want to thank you and the Director for all the Work you guys have been doing. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Oh, we got one. Hey, my bad. Go ahead.

You know, we're seeing huge gaps, right. And our civil engineers is this. That pipeline pathway where they work as a student helper, get assigned and shadow through. Shadow the work through a license in engineer and then kind of get into our Engineer 23 and 4 programs. Exactly.

Except right after graduation. I think it's one of the requirements that they start as an engineer in training or engineer one. But that's exactly the type of positions that we are really trying to target. You know, our purpose really is, especially for those students that are attending mainline colleges to, you know, see that they do have opportunities.

It might not just be with public service, but all of the working with consultants on design projects, this kind of like mentorship with our employees as well as the consultant, and also to just kind of get to know, I guess, network. I think it's very important.

So when they're getting into the engineering program and they apply, going to school, get their PE test out, do these hours qualify for them working under a licensed engineer? Because what I've seen is they do it right, they get their license, but they're struggling to try to find the work underneath a licensed mechanical engineer or civil engineer.

Would these hours aggregate to that?

I will get back to you. I have to check with the DCCA on the licensing requirements. I do know that there is that four year working under a pe. I don't know if, you know, they start at the engineer one. That counts. I think so. But I'll get back to you.

I think this would accelerate that. Right. Because there's so many hours that they have to accumulate. And if this is already kind of tacked in, that shadowing kind of shortens the time and then we end up with a civil or a mechanical engineer.

I definitely think it could if, you know, if our mentor is a PE. Yes.

Yeah. Okay, great. Thanks. Thanks, Chad. Thanks.

Anyone else? All right, good start. Good start. Thank you very much. Okay, we're going to be moving on to HB 2360 HD1 relating to paid family leave.

We have the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations in opposition,

Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. Jade Butai. You know, we support the goal of establishing paid family leave and we respectfully urge the Legislature to allow the actuarial and legal studies to be completed so the program can be implemented sustainably, effectively, and without jeopardizing Hawaii's existing protections.

Passing a bill before the study is finished puts the cart before the horse. If the Legislature, if the legislation is already in motion, can unintentionally steer the study's conclusion, turning the process into a self fulfilling prophecy. We believe that the responsible course is to let the study finish first. Thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you. Department of Taxation with comments.

Good morning. DOTAX stands on our written comments.

Thank you. Department of Human Resources Development with comments. DHRD will stand on its written testimony. Comments. Thank you. Maui Chamber of Commerce in opposition.

I'd like to also speak if I may. Oh please. Yes. Thank you. Thank you so much. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. I'm Pamela Tumpap, President of the Maui Chamber of Commerce and I'm here before you to oppose the this bill. And I wanted to add a little bit more to our written testimony.

We long, you know, have been supporting taking care of employees, family and medical needs and businesses have been doing that as long as they've existed to different degrees, but of course increasing over time. And where this bill falls short, and I agree that we need to have the study first, is it disproportionately impacts small businesses.

And all businesses are included in this bill. And we're at a time at a crossroads right now where we seeing many of our small businesses go under and you've seen businesses here go under, being impacted by rail, the economy, right. For Maui, it's our recovery efforts.

Small businesses are impacted the most and it's really critical that we look at this. And we're also at a time where again we have ranked 49 out of 50 states for the lack of a business friendly environment and a climate.

This is the time where we have to start doing more progressive things, understanding what businesses face, putting forward legislation that helps and looking at broader solutions. And we feel the study would do that. So we just wanted to share that it's a very important time.

Businesses are working on providing better care to their employees and have been addressing family and medical leave. So for that reason we ask that you defer, not let this bill move forward. This bill should not be moving forward at this time. We would ask that you do the same study first.

And we ask that you focus on a business friendly climate because if we don't have that, we can't get to the economic diversity, the recovery and sustain our small businesses the way we need to. And we keep saying we're supporting small businesses, but we need programs that show them we really are.

And we feel that this would disproportionately hurt them. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Hawaii Public Health Institute and support.

Chris Caulfield from the Hawaii Public Health Institute. We are in support of this bill. In a state that prioritizes aloha, no parent should have to choose between bonding with a newborn or paying rent. No worker should have to choose between caring for an ill loved one with their kupuna and keeping their job.

And the evidence is clear about family leave. Paid family leave improves maternal and infant health. It reduces premature birth, low birth weight. It lowers hospital readmissions. It supports healthier outcomes for both the parent and the child. It also strengthens economic stability, reduces poverty risk, and increases household income during the most vulnerable periods of a child's life.

In Hawai'i, the need could not be more urgent. There's a statistic that I learned this year that really crystallized why this program is so important. For me, the most overrepresented age group in our homeless population is 0 to 1. The next most overrepresented is 1 to 5. And for me, that should stop us in our tracks.

When infants are the face of homelessness in our state, the issue is not just housing. It's economic instability. It's the lack of a strong social safety net. And that's exactly what programs like paid family leave are intended to fix. Paid family leave is not a luxury. It's a public health necessity.

It is the infrastructure that allows families to not just survive, but to thrive in the islands. In response very quickly to the Department of Labor, the working group's efforts are essential.

But it's our understanding that this bill incorporates many of the working group's concepts and puts them out for public conversation so that they can be given public airtime and public consideration so that the working group can gather feedback on that.

So we would hope that you would support this measure and move it forward so that those conversations can also move forward this session. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We have ACLU Hawaii in support. Not present. AARP Hawaii in support.

Good morning, Chair Members of the Committee.

I'm Audrey Suga Nakagawa from AARP and we stand our testimony and support like what Chris had just said, we truly appreciate the work that the Department of Labor and the Legislature and the working group is already doing in terms of doing the actuarial studies that provides more data and that could develop and roll out a very robust program for the state of Hawaii.

We just want to point out that, you know, there's over 260,000 family work caregivers for taking care of loved ones. About 60% are working families. They have either a part time or a full time job. And we also do know that about 30% of them are sandwich generation.

So they're not only taking care of an older person, but also a children in their household. So having a paid family leave will help, definitely help support many of our families who are struggling to take care of their loved ones, as well as paying for their household needs and, you know, keeping a roof over their heads.

So thank you very much for the opportunity to support this parent.

Thank you. UPW in support.

Chair, Vice Chair UPW. We stand in our written testimony.

Support thank you. Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks in support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chairs, Members of the Committee again, I'm Nicole Wu from Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks. Thank you very much for hearing this bill. We're a children's organization. We work with parents.

So obviously we care about new parents having time to care for their newborns and also as the sandwich generation, to be able to take care of spouses or parents who are ill and not have to give up a paycheck. To address some of the opposition this morning, there have been many studies done.

We had almost 200 page study done nearly 10 years ago. The following session, the Legislature decided we needed another study which was done by LRB in 2019.

And then last year I worked with Vanderbilt University to do an actuarial study looking at all the other states that have it and then looking at our population, our age, our genders, our incomes, and looked at how much it costs in other states and how much it would cost here and we in all the other states, the program pays for itself.

It does not cost the state anything. Payroll deductions are taken into the system and then the cost costs for the state are covered by that. In some states, the bills, the laws actually say we will come back in two years and check and see if it's in balance and if it's not, we'll adjust.

We'll adjust the benefits, we'll adjust the taxes. So, you know, a lot of other states have this and this is something that you could put into the Bill.

The Vanderbilt University study last year found that for our state, for the amount of benefits that we were proposing in the Bill, which was basically looking at other states and doing what they're doing would cost 0.7% of payroll here in the state.

I looked at my employer and we use Pro Service, which is one of the largest HR companies in the state, and we are paying 0.5% of payroll just for TDI. This program would include TDI, so it would take away the cost of TDI from private employers and they would get so much more benefits for 0.7%.

On top of that, the Bill that was the proposal is that employers can split this cost with their employees up to 50%. So employers would be paying 0.35% for a full program while they're already paying 0.5% for TDI. So they would actually save money if they wanted to split the cost with their employees.

For small businesses, they are exempt from paying that second half. So they're paying only 0.35%. It literally makes it more affordable for small businesses than large businesses. So I really do hope folks would take a look at the Bill and really, you know, understand the numbers because we don't want to break the state.

We want it to work for everyone. So we feel like this study was passed in the current study everyone's talking about was passed last year, SCR 145. It was due 20 days before the start of this session.

It is delayed and we're working hard and we thank the Department of Labor for their work on it, but we think we can get started. All of these programs take a couple of years to implement, and so we want to keep this moving.

People are struggling to afford to live here and we've been talking about this for a really long time. So thank you for hearing this Bill again and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Grassroots Institute of Hawaii in opposition. Not present. HGA in support. HGA will stand in support. Do we have Chloe Vieira Villan Villanueva? Not present. Leilani Kaili Abba and support on Zoom.

Aloha. Can you get me.

I guess. Please proceed.

Okay. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. My name is Leilani Kailiawa and I'm here in strong support of HB2360. Nearly 10 years ago, on March 7, my infant son was hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit at Kapilani Medical center for Women and Children for long seven months.

I live on Hawaii island, but my baby was on Oahu. I had to live on another island away from my husband and two older sons who were 11 and 13. At that time, there was no paid family leave. I made an impossible choice. I quit my job.

Families should never have to choose between financial survival and being present for a medically fragile child. Being by my son's bedside was not optimal. It was essential to his healing, his development, and my role as a mother. HB 2360 is about dignity. It's about recognizing that caregiving is not a luxury. It is critical care.

Paid family leave would ensure that families can show up for one another in moments of crisis without taking everything. I urge you to please pass this bill as no family has to make the sacrifice minded just to care for their child. Put ohana.

Thank you. Joell Edwards.

Good morning. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Members, thank you so much for hearing this bill again. My name is Joel Edwards. I'm a resident of Hawaii and a small business owner. And I also serve on the Cade Family Medical League working group bringing the perspective of small businesses.

I stand in strong support of this measure and I'm speaking not in theory, but actually from lived experience. Nearly 20 years ago, my husband became critically ill and was in and out of the ICU for seven months. At that time, we were living in a state that had paid family and medical leave. That program saved us.

It protected our mortgage, our financial stability and our peace of mind so we all could focus on recovery. Recovery. As soon as his recovery was stabilized, we moved back to Kauai. Years later, almost four years ago, my son and daughter in law faced a very different experience.

When our grandson was born, he was immediately medevacked over to Oahu for more than two months followed by repeated return appointments. The time away from work and the cost of travel created significant financial strain on them. They ultimately lost their housing here on Kauai.

And although they moved in with us, they saw that the reality of needing ongoing medical support for their child and stable employment that could accommodate those needs, that financial pressure became overwhelming and that combination is what led them all move out of the state. As a small business owner, I see how these pressures ripple outward.

Families leave and as employers, we lose good workers. Our communities are growing smaller. Paid family and medical leave is not abstract. Policy is stability. It's about keeping ohana together and keeping our families in Hawaii. I urge you to support this measure and mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. We have Christine Andrews in support on zoom not present. Okay, that's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us.

Also additional comments from Department of Budget and Finance as well as the county of Honolulu, Budget and Fiscal Services, support from the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women, the Office of Wellness and resilience, 13 organizations and 47 individuals, plus two other organizations with comments and three organizations opposed.

Anybody else in the room wishing to testify, please come forward and just state your name and s for the record.

Sarah Milianta-Laffin on behalf of HSTA. So thank you again for hearing this bill. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, the advocates in the room really know this condition well. My job as your teacher lobbyist is I come to bring the stories of your educators from across the street to this body.

So when I thought about we've worked on paid family leave for years. We know it's something that needs to happen. We know right now the system we have is broken, especially for teachers. When I thought about the story that I could bring to you today, I decided to tell a personal story about one that's close to home.

Sixth grade teacher Kelly Kamana works at Holomola elementary in Ewa Beach. She's an incredible teacher. I've worked with for very many years. On February 11, she got the news that no parents. You get that her son had been having headaches. Little Rexton, he's here in the front and took him to the ER.

Just thought it was a headache. Days later, figured out that it's a really aggressive brain tumor. So what happens for teachers if you don't have days? You have to. Basically other teachers work together to donate days to that person so they could be with their family. It's a ridiculous system.

The state's broken paid family leave system, especially for educators, means that teacher altruism is what's paying for it.

I myself had a C section on December 15, and I thought it was so important to be with y' all at this body that I came back after four weeks, which was not even recommended by my doctor, and also didn't have days anyway, so I don't have days to give her.

But all of us, all of the teachers who love her are trying to gather these days together to do that. So this system, I agree the study is super important, but Kelly should not be worrying about her job, should not be worrying about anything but sitting down the street with her baby by his bed.

And we have to fix this system and we have to fix it now. And there are beautiful brains in this room who know how to do it. You have the ability.

Moving forward, please support this legislation and please just understand the lived experiences of the people in our community when we don't have a system that works like real families. Hurt. Thank you.

Thank you. Oh, yeah. Please go forward. Yeah. And just again, state your name and position for the record before you begin.

Aloha.

My name is Mai Hall. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm speaking here today as a parent advocate representing Hawaii Children's Action Network. As you heard Nicole say, there have been many, many studies already done, many actuarials. You've got the data, you've got reports, you've got studies.

I'm not here to talk about that because that's like way over my head as a parent. What I'm here to tell you today is a story. A story that happened like my other parent advocates here in this room some years ago. My husband was training as an active duty service Member serving his country.

He was away and I was home alone with my children for eight months. I got sick. I had to take temporary disability insurance, TDI with my job. I was fully employed. You're renting beautiful apartment in Uanu. We're a happy family as can be. But then I got sick.

I had to spend many weeks in the hospital, which prompted my mother to come live with me to take care of my children. At that time, she also was fully employed and had to take fmla. Fmla, as we know, still saves your job, but it does not pay you.

And what family in Hawai' I has three months worth of wages to take off for an unpaid FMLA job? My mother had to go to the bank to take a loan to pay for her rent to take care of my kids so I could get better.

In this day and age, many, many parents also suffer these types of health effects. You'll never know when you have a health emergency in your family. And paid family and medical leave would cover the costs. So we can pay our rent, we can pay our bills, and we can afford to take care of our families.

We cannot wait another year. This bill has been up for at least a decade, as far as I know cannot wait more years. And more years go by as families suffer in Hawaii.

I request that this bill move forward, that you look at the studies already done and that you listen to the parent voices of the residents in Hawaii who are still trying to live and survive in Hawaii. But we need your help to do so. I urge you to pass Page Family Medical. Mahalo.

Thank you. One more testifier.

The Chamber of Commerce Hawaii stands on its written testimony appreciative of the measure's intent. Comments with concerns. Thank you.

Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom.

Rep. Perruso.

Yeah. So for DLIR, where is J? Thank you for being here today. So I just have a question about your testimony. In your testimony, you said that you had hired a consultant to prepare the RFP. So does that mean that the RFP for this actuarial study has not even been issued?

Yeah, that's correct. The person is going to be writing the RFP. He'll be the one writing the RFP. And hopefully before the start of the next session, we'll have a of the report.

Okay, and then I'm. My second question, if I may, Chair, is just to follow up on what the folks from HCAN said about the actuarial study that was conducted or completed already in this time period by Vanderbilt University.

And I'm wondering if you've had a chance to look at that study and if so, why we would not be able to use that in place of the one that is meant to be contracted.

Well, you know, we're ultimately be the one responsible for the you know, the success or the failure of this program. And, you know, from, you know, past experience with, you know, mainland consultants on Hawaii program, I mean, for example, it's, you know, the rail where originally was 3.5 billion, but now it's about 12 billion.

So, you know, these studies have no, you know, they don't have a established pattern of accurate or dependable analysis. And you know, from our perspective, you know, we cannot afford to see things in rose colored glasses because, you know, basically from, I mean, passing the legislation, I think that's going to be the easiest part.

It's going to be the implementation that is going to be the most challenging because basically, I mean, we're creating a division that is bigger than some departments like DHRD or BNF or, you know, from employee numbers.

Right.

I mean, we've spoken about this at length before and so, and I appreciate your position and your analysis of the complexity, but I guess my question is, so are you saying that you are only issuing this RFP for consultants who are not from the continent because your concern with the Vanderbilt study seems to be that it isn't a local consultant?

Well, that, I mean, like I said, I think there should be something that is very, that's comprehensive. I mean, I mean, we, there's been studies that were done in the past where they didn't even talk to the DLIR who's supposed to implement the program and they're using mainland data and I don't think that's useful for us.

Okay, thank you. Thank you. Chair.

Rep. Kusch.

Thank you, Chair. For DLIR. Looking at these implementation costs in this range, if this is going to, excuse me. If this is already going to kind of replace and kind of overlay TDI, as I understand one of the testifiers.

And if you think about the fam, the Fla, Family Leave Administrative act or whatever it's called, that's a federal program that you folks administer, correct? Yes. If you think about those overlays, and this is maybe just an expansion of TDI or maybe we could call it TDI plus.

If we didn't call it Family Leave, what would be the ramp up? If you already have the staffing and infrastructure to run those TDI programs and now you're adding like an additional component to it, the audit concerns, the paperwork, the. I mean, I imagine a lot of this would be online.

Like I remember, the FLA used to be very cumbersome. Then it moved to online. So I'm just wondering what, what would, you know, spool up these costs looking at our state compared to these three you have on here. You know we have a range between, if you compare it to the size of our state compared to those.

And I know there's, there's more to it than that. These are just rough numbers. It's like 7 million to 20 million and ramp up costs. These are much larger states as population is wise. So I'm just wondering what, why would it range so high?

What would $80 million bias if we're just having an expansion of an existing program?

I have my subject matter expert, she's Joanne Biddenhar is our administrator of our disability compensation division.

Thank you, thank you, thank you for the questions. And when we talk about temporary disability, temporary disability actually does not pay out claims. And so our temporary disability section consists of four employees. And those four employees process temporary disability claims that the private carriers do the claim adjustment on.

And so this is a new program because we would not with temporary disability, pay out the claims. That's what the private carriers do.

And so if you're looking at replacing temporary disability with paid family leave, then that's a different subject that we have to talk about is with those private carriers, what happens with those private carriers and how we transition off of temporary disability into paid family leave.

Besides that, looking at the composition of a position for paid family leave, best guesstimates that we can do without having this full actuarial study is to look at our unemployment insurance division.

In our unemployment insurance division, if we look at LBR 171 under the Appropriated Fund under the budget, we look at their structure as based on that 120 employees. So based on the 120 employees, the breakdown of your 80 million is a startup cost. So we have the staffing, but we also have the it.

So our temporary disability, because we do not have a program designed that pays out claims, you'd have to have a brand new program put into place. So I look at the unemployment program and look at what the legislators approve for UI.

And so the UI program funding was 46.8 million and then an additional 11 million that came from the Federal Government. Well, we don't have a federal, it wouldn't be federally funded. So I'm looking at the 57.8 million as a startup for a program to design.

And we know with unemployment insurance the design of that has taken us a couple of years. And so looking at 57.8, so almost 60 million. And that's just on a rough estimate that doesn't include any of the maintenance of the program itself. And then the additional 22 million is to get the staffing.

That cost for the startup does not include any of facilities because we don't have facilities to house this. That's getting a little bit down into the weeds. That's why we have an actuarial coming in for this analysis and it is based on Hawaii data. That's what is important for this actuarial analysis.

Some of these studies, we appreciate the studies and we will utilize all of these studies and share it with the consultant so they can see the groundwork that has already been put into place. But it's a twofold and on the second fold of our actual analysis is a legal review.

Hawaii is very unique with our prepaid health care. We have an ERISA exemption and the ERISA exemption says that we cannot or because of the ERISA exemption we cannot mandate that an employer has to do additional, provide additional benefits for the employees.

So how the bill is drafted, it says that if an employee is on paid family leave, then the employer will provide the health care throughout the time that the individual is on leave. Well, that conflicts with our prepaid health care law. Our prepaid health care law has a three month cap.

And so if we're going past that three month cap, that's the legal analysis. If there is not a conflict with the law, with the interplay of federal and state laws under the code of Federal regulations, then we don't have a problem there. But we don't have that answer.

And so we need an expert, an ERISA expert to do that legal review. And so it's twofold here. It's not just moving a program forward, looking at an analysis as to how many staffing we need and what that proper benchmark is.

But if we, this bill is written kind of similar to TDI, but TDI, there's a lot of differences between what is provided by TDI and prepaid.

I hope that answers your questions. So two follow ups. That was really great. I appreciate that. I'm not a subject matter specialist in this area, although I've had three daughters so that, you know, I have that experience.

So my follow up questions are, would this be, could it be handled by an insurance carrier, an expansion of those TDI insurance carriers and if there was, whether it's this bill or a future bill, could those be, could it be handled by that or does it have to be something that is managed by the state far as the payments to manage the medical care for 90 days?

And a lot of those details that you spoke of, Great question to Kind of like scale back the state's involvement, provide, you know, that business that's already being handled by private folks who have all the systems in place. And it's. As an expansion.

Yes, absolutely. That is part of the actuarial analysis to see what is the state and not just, we don't want to say, because we do support the goal of paid family leave. And so if it's not beneficial or affordable for the state, should it be run by a private. Previous bills?

Yes, Connecticut has. They outsource it, but it costs way more.

So that's where you have to find that balance, because we do have. When we first started this many years ago, that was one of the options. And there were several bills that came through that private carriers would run this program, and then there was a hybrid.

And so this is what we ended up with because of the cost, may be a little bit more, but that's what we want, the actual analysis, to which we don't find in any of the other reports, to make that determination of what is best for Hawaii itself. Is it private?

Is it with, like you said, a time frame of the 90 days, or is it that the state at state run. We do have some challenges having it state run. We do have some insurance carriers that came to us several years ago that said we could run up a program. We can start one up.

We were excited about that, but that bill did not pass. So this is where we're at today.

But thank you for that. Yield, sir. Thank you. Appreciate the details. Anyone on this side, any questions for DLIR Hartsfield? And then Rep. Lee.

Yeah sorry. Thank you. Okay. And this might be an unfair question, but. So if this bill were passed and the actual study is done a year from now, according how, how the bill is written, you have until January 1st of 2020 to establish and administer a family medical leave insurance program and to begin collecting contributions.

So assuming the bill were to pass, you get the study done, what more would your Department need so that this could be a successful program?

Yeah, well, I think I would be trying to force a round plate in a square hole, because then you already predetermined. I mean, so what's the point of even doing the study? That's why we're saying, let's finish, let's complete the study so that we don't, we don't want to unintentionally skew it to how we want the conclusion.

Okay. Given the question I asked, that's a fair answer. So I want to piggyback on what Rep. Perruso had asked. There are several studies already available. And why hasn't the Department considered any of those studies before deciding that it has to be an actuarial with these specific parameters?

Well, there were two studies that were done before that, you know, before the Vanderbilt. They were the women's study. And the concern was that they were. They didn't use Hawaii data. And then on top of that, I mean, they didn't go talk to the people that. Who would have to make this thing work.

I mean, it doesn't make any sense where you say you're responsible for this, but you don't have any say on how is that going to be. They didn't talk to the Department when they did the study.

Okay, so what are the parameters of this RFP then that will make it acceptable to the Department?

I think I will also add to what the Director has said, is that besides it being a General understanding of Hawaii, it's not getting into the specifics of what our minimum wage is, what our cost of living is, the medical expenses that we have here.

But what we'd be looking at is for a successful program, what the actuarial will be looking at is really the. What is the feasible premium contributions and in addition to the contributions, what the actual program expenses are. If we go with the bill as written now, it's a little bit different than. Well, it actually, it's not.

It doesn't have all of. The areas that we'd like to have assessed. And so with that we're missing some of the areas that we think are important.

Okay, could you share what some of those areas? Yep.

So we have a trust fund that has to be set up and so what is the reserve funds that would be needed? And so we have an understanding of there's a startup cost, but we also know that by a certain date we have to pay out claims.

And that trust fund looks a little bit different in without understanding what FOIA specific needs are to know how much that trust fund. So it really is establishing a foundation. And when we pass these measures, I have a target that keeps on moving.

So we've already set a draft of an RFP that our consultant is helping us to massage and to formalize so that the consultant can look at this bigger picture. But if I allow, if we continue to allow the measure to move forward, I don't know what the changes are going to be.

And so if I have any changes in the premium contribution rates, the time frame of what's going to get paid up, what the startup money is going to be, all of that is under the qualifications and amounts needed for this program. And then besides that, it's reviewing what the performance is of other states.

There are very many lessons learned that we have on our own gone out to other states and found out what these lessons are because we have states and you can read which they have reports, their annual reports that they give to their bodies of areas that are deficient.

And so if we're going to run a program here in Hawaii, a brand new program, we want it to be successful and we've, we can't come and ask for 80 million for startup of just a portion when we don't know what the actual startup is.

And the quote that is given at that point, 7% and that would reduce TDI. We don't know if in the best interest TDI should be part of the program or it should not be. And so those are the types of things that we really want to look at.

Program implementation, which timelines, the claim process, appeal process, the benefit distribution, and what is available for us for this IT development. Those are some of the areas.

Okay, thank you, thank you for your answer. Thank you for your efforts. I just want to say that should this bill not pass, you know we have eyes on you and you know we want this to happen. I'm sure your Department wants this to happen as well. So please work as expeditiously as possible. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Additional questions on this end.

Thank you. And thank you for bringing up the lesson from other states. I know during the summer, you know, we talked about, I would encourage my colleagues to look at Colorado and Washington who did not have actual actuarial studies done.

Colorado may not have, you know, we need to make sure that we manage it correctly. And by saying that I, I do want to pass this out, I do want to do the right thing.

But I guess related to Representative Hartsfield's question, how long would it take for the IT modernization, the hiring and more so, you know, setting up a Department that may have to take in tens of thousands of claims, how long would that take you to pass it today?

That's, that's a question that we don't have an answer for how long it would take. And that's part of what the actuarial analysis will help us with because we need to look at Hawaii labor market. I can't look at. And that's what, you know, when we put in our testimony, we always put in Washington, Colorado and Oregon.

They're really good states for us to follow what they're doing, but they have a different labor market than we do in Hawaii. It was brought up before about our high population of small businesses, but we also have large kupuna here.

And so our program would be utilized a little bit different because there may be more usage of paid family leave because of our kapuna population. But with that said, having these three states and there are and I they

start up with a startup cost but then they, they have a deficiency and then they got to come back for more money. That's not something that we want to be able to do. We want to be able to say from the beginning what the actual cost of a program is.

And I'm not always the smartest person in the room and I know that. But I'm just wondering to make it black or white based on what you're saying about the actuarial study, can dlir set up an effective system and pay down indeed system without the actual study being done to define the parameters that

part we could to have a most successful program. I'm not going to say we can't, but I can't without that legal analysis. And that legal analysis has to be done. And I think I'm just going to go back to. That's why the Senate conclusion resolution was passed because it is understood that, that it's a twofold.

It's the legal part of it. And then it's what is the actuarial analysis? I could give you some real rough numbers, but is that really going to help us to give you these rough numbers when I can't back up how I'm coming up with those numbers.

Question do we have and maybe it's a very rough estimate then. Right. Of how many people would be impacted by big value and how much.

We don't because we look at the studies and we look at our estimates and they are just so all over the place. And the actuarial study would help. Yes. And that's the lessons that we are finding, the lessons learned from the other states that didn't do their actuarial study. That's why their programs are having some significant challenges.

And that's not what we want. We want to start a new program that would be successful. We are supporting the goal of a paid family leave in Hawaii.

I know that and we've been working on that. But that's all. Thank you.

We have Rep. Takenouchi and then we'll go Perruso and Kusch.

Quick clarifying question about all this conversation around the past actuarial studies versus the one you're doing so during the Department of Science is the ones recently done were not based on home data. Correct. That's the general sense of why you guys want to finish the one you guys are going to RFP out.

There has been no validation that has been on Hawaii data. But there's also some areas that we're not sure if it was taken into consideration.

And then, sorry, the part about the legal analysis for ERISA is that the first time this is being done in one of these actuarial studies that a

legal analysis is the first time a legal analysis has been done on our prepaid exemption, ERISA exemption. There is no court cases. And so that's what makes this so challenging.

That's actually very concerning to me because John, you and I have talked in depth about ERISA. Thank you for all your background to help me understand some of the pitfalls that might be around that. And so as a quick follow up to that part then. So when you guys flag this as the ERISA issue is this.

So has our attorney, the department's attorney General, weighed in or given any kind of indication if they think we're really going to be potentially running afoul with the ERISA exemption or what's. Because they don't like attorney General didn't provide us anything today.

I looked back as long as I've been a Member, which hasn't been that long, but they don't weigh in on this bill.

So we have had conversations over the years with them. Yes, we meet with them as well as we have met with two legal experts that have some knowledge of erisa, but those legal experts do not have knowledge of Hawaii prepaid law. And so that's what we're out there trying to find, this individual that can understand Hawaii's law.

So that's where the interplay with the CRF is, the interplay between the state and the federal laws. And so with our egs, we've met with them. I mean this goes back a decade that we've met with them. And there is a risk, there's always a risk with this.

And that's why we want to hire out this legal consultant that will be able to give the state of Hawaii and the, the AGs are involved in this procurement process to review the applications that come in for this rfp, because it is a legal analysis. Actually it's a legal opinion for the state to stand on.

Okay. No, thank you for that clarification. Thank you, Chair.

Great. Rep. Perruso.

Vice Chair, asked my question. Yeah.

Rep. Kusch.

Thank you, Chair. You know, understanding that there's a baseline startup cost to this to school up, is there any value in scaling the operation? It sounds like listening to this testimony now, it sounds like there's a big unknown as to kind of the limits and other states have kind of blown out or blown through what they expected.

And is there any value in scaling to like I remember FMLA has different categories. Like if you're a veteran or if it's Kupuna Care, it's childbirth or long term sickness, they have different categories. Is there any value in limiting your known claims like by starting off with newborns, paid family leave or just newborns.

And you have a pretty, you could probably have a pretty strong target of how many newborns there are each year within the state and then scale up and say in 12 months or 18 months after that that we go to this. Is there any value in that?

Thank you for the question. That's where we started. We started with how can we look at who would qualify the qualifying members. Because we do think that this is a big scale. If we could downsize that and make it, it's more manageable as well as have the option if it's the state or if it's.

We put everything in the basket for this over the years, but this is what always comes out. And so is there value? As a subject matter expert? I tell you, yes, there is. But that's not what's in front of us. It continues to come out that this is what is requested.

A global solution.

Yes.

Okay, thank you, Chair.

Any final questions? All right, thank you very much. We're going to be Moving on to HB2387 HD1 relating to workers compensation, medical benefits.

First, we have Department of Labor and Industrial Relations in support.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair and Members standing our testimonies.

Nobody else indicating that they would be joining us, but testimony and support from the Disability and Communication Access Board, two organizations and one individual. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions? Oh, we have someone on Zoom.

Please just state your name for the Committee and proceed.

Hi, my name is Orion Godfrey.

Oh, thank you. Please, please proceed.

Okay. Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak regarding this measure before you today. My name is Orion Godfrey and I'm a full time firefighter in Arizona since January of 2008.

And over the last several years, I've been able to take on the roles that help directly address the occupational cancer issue that the fire service faces. One of those roles is a governor's appointment, the Industrial Commission of Arizona, which is similar in responsibilities to your DLIR.

In this role, we're charged with, among many other tasks, the Claims Division, which helps supervise and process Arizona's presumptive legislation and firefighter cancer claims. As a member of the commission, I get to see the legal side of the struggle that firefighters face during their battle of cancer. And one of the.

As a commissioner, one of the struggles that we've. One of the challenges that we've faced over the years was legislative language that left unclear the intent of our state's answer presumptive law. It's taken decades to achieve a version of our bill that firefighters and the public can get behind.

I acknowledge the efforts today by this body to address this issue proactively is not just an issue that affects firefighters. Occupational cancer in the fire service is a problem that impacts every man, woman and child in Hawaii. The readiness of our firefighters and their ability to respond to an emergency is directly dependent on a healthy workforce.

Firefighting itself as an occupation is one of the few occupations that's categorized by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is the gold standard of cancer research as a Group 1 carcinogen. So that's the highest level. It is a known carcinogen. Just having the job of a firefighter.

Logic tells us that the best way to avoid toxic exposures are to avoid the substance altogether. But as long as firefighters are willing to risk everything and we are to save a saveable life, we'll be exposed to and feel the effects of the hundreds of carcinogens that we come into contact with during every fire.

The facts of our situation are grim. We have a 9% higher chance of a cancer diagnosis than the General public does. And once we have a diagnosis, we have a 15% higher mortality rate.

In addition, these statistics are concerning because the General public's numbers are taken across the average lifespan of the man or woman, whereas the firefighter numbers are taken from a generally healthy work, more healthy work population and only a 20 to 30 year career.

So additionally, these types of cancers that firefighters are facing are more and more rare and are found in younger firefighters every year. So additionally, my duties are with the professional firefighters of Arizona.

And one of the things that I do is supply support to over the 9,000 firefighters that are in the PFFA when they come into in contact with cancer. And what I normally face is firefighters fighting for their rights instead of for their health.

And I applaud the efforts made by this and I believe that legislation like this will allow firefighters in Hawaii to focus on their health instead of fighting for the rights.

Thank you. Anybody else on Zoom wishing to testify?

All right, Members, any questions on this measure? Seeing on we're going to move on to HB2472HD1 related to the Hawaii Employer Union, Health Benefits Trust Fund, staff, salaries, Members.

Nobody indicating they would be joining us, but testimony and support from the EUTF Board of Trustees and two organizations. Anybody else in the room wishing to Testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, we're gonna move straight on to HB 1805 HD1 related to child welfare.

First, we have the Department of the Attorney General with comments.

Good morning Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Tiffany Chang, Attorney General, we did submit written comments. We have some concerns about the statutory construction of the bill in HD1. Our suggestion is to make these a completely independent agency under the legislation, the same way that the Ombudsman, the Auditor Bureau is and I'm available for any question. Thank you.

Thank you. University of Hawaii with comments on Zoom.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee, Farrah-Marie Gomes, Associate Vice President for Student Affairs with the University of Hawaii System. We have provided written comments for HB 1805 HB1 and we'd like to also express our support for the legislature's goal of strengthening child welfare oversight.

We're here to answer any question. Appreciate the opportunity to testify today. Mahalo.

Thank you. That's everyone indicating they'd be joining us Members. Also please note comments from the Office of the Support from the Hawaii Correction Correctional System Oversight Commission. Support from one organization and three individuals as opposition from one individual. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

All right, Members, any questions on this measure? Seeing none, we're going to move on to HB2469 HD1 relating to a regular session review working group

Members. Nobody indicating they would be joining us. But please note comments from the State Procurement Office, Legislative Reference Bureau and Office of Information Practices. Testimony and support from one organization and one individual opposing. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify in this measure. Anybody on Zoom?

All right, we're going to move straight on to HB 1815 HD1 relating to the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts.

We have the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts in support on Zoom.

Not present. That's everybody who indicated that they would be joining us today. Also, testimony from two organizations and five individuals all in support. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, again, as no one's present, we're going to move on to the next item on the agenda. HB 1860 HD1 relating to the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra.

If the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts joined us on zoom, they are in support present and the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra in support.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Dane Lam. I'm the music and artistic Director of the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra. It's been a very long hearing, so I'll keep this very brief, but I don't need to go into the cultural benefits, the educational benefits, mental health benefits of having a symphony orchestra in the community.

But I do want to just touch briefly on the benefits to the economy. Hawai' I Symphony Orchestra is the largest performing arts employer in the state, with over 100 employees every year. Many other states have supported their symphony orchestras. New Jersey, Utah, North Carolina, Florida, to name a few.

And in fact, the Pittsburgh Symphony commissioned a study very recently on the economic benefits of having an orchestra in the community, which demonstrated a fourfold return for every $1 invested in the orchestra.

So the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra reaches over 40,000 direct audience members who come to our concerts, who pay for tickets, who go and park, go out for restaurants, go to the bar, not to mention our 85 musicians who live in the state, many of whom would not live in the state, state, teach our children, pay into the economy if it weren't for the Hawaii Symphony.

So I thank you very much for hearing this bill and urge your support. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

That is everybody indicating they would be joining us today. Also support from 5 organizations and 24 individuals as well as 2 individuals in opposition. Is anybody else in the room looking to testify?

Hello, I'm Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm Randy Wong, present CEO of Hawaii Youth Symphony on behalf of all the kids, we are in strong support of the Hawaii Newark.

Thank you. Yes, we have your testimony and anybody on Anybody else in the room? Anybody on Zoom?

Great, thank you. Member, any question? Any Members, any questions on this measure? Seeing none, we're going to move on to HB2117 HC1 relating to the arts.

We have the Department of Education in support. Not present. DBEDT in support.

Morning. Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, my name is Arthur Buto. I'm here for Mary Al Sevens, the Director of the Office of Planning Sustainable Development. We stand in support of our questions.

Thank you. Thank you. State foundation on Culture and the Arts in support on Zoom.

Not present.

Not present. Hawaii Symphony Orchestra in support.

Dane Lamb, Hawaii Symphony Orchestra. And we stand at our testimony.

Thank you. Hawaii Youth Symphony and support.

Very much in support. Also just wanted to mention that the testimony that was received from from the DOE and from charter schools and from independent schools and all these arts organizations coming together really helps us to really think about how important arts equitable access is for kids all across the state. So thank you very much.

Thank you. That's everybody who indicated they'd be joining us. Also additional testimony and support from 6 organizations and 22 individuals. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify, please.

Aloha, Chair and Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Rick Manayan on behalf of DBEDT, we stand in support of our written testimony of this measure.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room? Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions on this measure? Seeing none. We're going to move on to HB2118 HD1 relating to the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism.

First we have the Department of and General Services and support Vice Chair.

We send our written testimony and support this.

Thank you. And State foundation on Culture and the Arts and support on Zoom. Not present. Not present. That's everyone indicating they'd be joining us. Also comments from DBEDT and support from two individuals. Anybody in the room wishing to testify?

Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions? Seeing none, we're gonna move on to HB2437 HD1 related to arts education.

Department of Education and support. Not present. State foundation on Culture and the Arts and support on Zoom. Hawaii Community foundation and support. Thank you. Members. Also please note additional testimony and support from four organizations and 10 individuals. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify?

Hi, anybody from the Hawaiian Just also wanted to support.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, Members, any questions? Seeing none. HB2438 HD2 relating to the Hawaii Cultural Trust.

I have the Department of Taxation with comments. No Tax stands on its written comments. Thank you. Tax foundation of Hawaii with comments on Zoom.

Thank you. Chair, Vice Chair. Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation. We think this works in a very weird way. We. We have detailed comments in our testimony. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. State foundation on Culture and the Arts and support on Zoom. Not present. Not present. Okay, Members, please also note comments from DBEDT and the county of Honolulu Department of Customer Services. Support from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, two other organizations and three individuals. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions? All right, moving on to HB 2604 HD1 relating to performing arts.

Department of Taxation with comments.

Stands on its written comments.

Thank you. State foundation on Culture and the Arts in support on Zoom. Stand up. Thank you. We have Rick Baratolini presents in opposition on Zoom. Not present. And Tom Yamachika, Tax foundation of Hawaii with comments on Zoom.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair. Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika for Tax Foundation. We do note that selling performing arts tickets is already subject to GE tax. And we are just kind of wondering what the justification is for imposing a differential, you know, something that other industries would not pay. Thank you very much. Happy answering questions.

Thank you. That's everyone indicating they'd be joining us. Members. Also testimony and support from two organizations and three individuals, as well as one organization and two individuals opposing. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify?

Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions? All right, we have two more items on our agenda. We have HB 1590 HD2 relating to vacation rentals.

Department of Taxation with comments.

DOTAX stands on its written comments. Thank you.

Thank you. Office of Hawaiian affairs in support. Unzoom Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments on Zoom.

Thank you, Chair, Vice chair. Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation. We will stand the written comments.

Thank you. We have the Hawaii Mid and Short Term Rental alliance with comments on Zoom.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair and Members of The Committee My name is Caitlin Miller on behalf of the Hawaii Mid and Short Term Rental Alliance, IMASS appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on HB 1590 HD2 and supports the bill's efforts to modernize tax Administration and clarify hosting platform tax collection responsibilities.

These provisions represent constructive steps that can improve compliance and administrative consistency across the marketplace. As the Committee considers implementation of Part one related to screenshot evidence, we would like to briefly share one practical example regarding this today.

Approximately 10 days ago, a host living locally on Oahu received a notice of violation that included a screenshot showing only a small portion of her listing. The image did not reflect the full context of her rules, despite her operating lawfully and in good faith, and she was required to engage in violation response process to demonstrate compliance.

This is particularly meaningful given that county enforcement penalties can reach up to $10,000 per day. Hi Mas understands the intent behind allowing screenshots as an enforcement tool. Our request is simply that screenshots function as a part of an investigative process rather than a standalone determination.

PIMAS has proposed clarifying guardrails related to source verification, completeness and corroboration with specific language included in our written testimony for the committee's consideration. Our goal is to support clear and consistent standards that promote accuracy, fairness and confidence in implementation.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify and I do have that language if you would like to hear it orally as well.

Thank you. We have. Sorry, Members, I lost my place. Oh, that's everyone who indicated they would be joining us. Please also note testimony in support from the from DBEDT, comments from the Hawaii Tourism Authority as well as two organizations and opposition from one organization and two individuals. Anybody in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, Members, any questions on this measure? Seeing none. We're going to move to HB2156HD1 relating to taxation.

First we have the Department of Taxation with comments. So tax documents, written comments. Thank you. And Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments on Zoom.

Tax Foundation sends written comments.

Thank you, Members. Also, two individuals with testimony in support. Is that. That's all the written testimony we received. Anybody in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members, any questions on HB2156? If not that we're moving to the last item on our agenda before we get started. I just want to assure the film alliance and the film community that this is not the last item we will hear. So don't. Don't be scared. More coming next week. Don't want to sound the alarm.

Only one on the agenda, HB 2268 HD 1 relating to film production.

Angie Chapman, Governor's office. Here on behalf of Will Payne, senior advisor. The office of the Governor stands on its written testimony support. Thank you.

We have the office of the Governor in support along with Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee.

We have the Kapolei Chamber of Commerce. Oh, no. Unless they're here, but they did not indicate they would be. We have the Hawaii Film alliance in support on Zoo Aloha.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, mahalo for allowing us to testify. We stand on our written test testimony and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. SAG Afra Hawaii Local in support on Zoom. Not present. Not present. And Cares. In support on Zoom. Not present, not present. Hey, Members, that's all the people indicating they be joining us. Please also note support from DB and HTA as well as one organization and three individuals. One individual in opposition.

Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify?

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair.

Thank you.

Anybody else in the room? Anybody on zoom.

Okay, Members, any questions on this measure? All right. If not, we're going to recess briefly so that Members can join us to complete the vote. Recess and reconvene in the near future recession.

Aloha. We are reconvening for the purposes of decision making on our 10am agenda. First item on our agenda is HB 11833 HD 2 the chair's recommendation is to move this forward amended as an HD3 including some necessary technical amendments. Are there any questions or comments from the Committee? Okay Seeing none. Go ahead.

Members voting on HB 1183 HD2 recommendations to pass with amendments. [Roll call]

Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Next item is HB 1656 HD1 relating to indebted indebtedness to the state. Treasure's recommendation is to move this forward as is. Any questions or comments? Seeing none.

Members voting on HB 1656 HD1 recommendations to pass unamended Noting the presence of all Committee Members who will be noted as present for the rest of the votes on this agenda unless otherwise announced. Are there any reservations? Any no votes.

Recommendations adopted. HB 1658 HD1 relating to collective bargaining. The Chair's recommendation is to move this forward as is. Any questions or comments? Seeing None.

Vice Chair HB 1658 HD 1658HD 1. Recommendations to pass unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations adopted

HB 1661 HD1 relating to cafeteria plans. Chair's recommendation is to move forward as is. Any questions or comments? No, go ahead.

HB1661HD1 recommendations to pass? Unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes?

Recommendations adopted for HB 1663 HD1 relating to reimbursement of public officers and employees. The Chair's recommendation is to move this Forward as an HD2 with a technical amendment. Any questions or comments? Seeing None. Vice Chair.

HB1663HD1 recommendations to pass with amendments. Any reservations? Any no votes. Recommendations adopted thank you.

HB 1664 HD1 relating to the Hawaii Employer Union Health Benefits Trust Fund. Chair's recommendation is to move this forward as is. Any questions or comments? Seeing none.

HB 1664 HD1 recommendations passed unamended. Any reservations?

Any no votes recommendations adopted HB 1859 HD1 relating to workforce development the Chair's recommendation is to move this forward as is. Are there any questions or comments? Seeing none.

Vice Chair HB 1859, HD1 recommendation to pass. Unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes, recommendations adopted.

Thank you. On HB 216 HD 2 relating to grants, the Chair's recommendation will be to be moving this forward as is. I think we may have a question or two or a comment or two. Okay. Rep. Gedeon.

I'll be voting yes with comment. Just a request that there's an amendment that at least one Member of the minority caucus be included on the Special Legislative Evaluation and Selection Committee. Okay.

And thank you.

So I share the concerns of the legal and reporters. So I'll be voting with reservations.

Okay. Anyone else on this measure? Sorry. Okay. Seeing nothing else, I will note in the Committee report the concerns of the minority. I would also note. You know, I need to put wr. zero, wr. Okay. Yeah, we'll just.

We'll just note those committees in the note, those concerns in the Committee report, as well as some of the concerns raised by the legal women voters. Anyone else, if not Vice chair for the Quad.

HB2116, HD2 recommendations to pass. Unamended. Noting reservations from Reps. Peruso and Gideon. Any other reservations? Any no votes Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Next we have HB2271HD1. The Chair's recommendation is to move this forward as an HD2 because there was an additional number that's been kind of forwarded in a GM and this will just reflect that last number that not included in the current draft. Do we have any questions on this measure? Seeing None. Vice Chair.

HB2271, HD1 recommendations to pass with amendments. Any reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Next we have HB2276HD1 relating to the Hawaii Employer Union Health Benefits Trust Fund investment off staff salaries, office staff salaries. Chair's recommendation is to move this forward, as is. Any questions or comments? Seeing none.

HB2276, HD1 recommendations to pass. Unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations adopted. Thank you.

Next we have HB2335, HD1 relating to workforce development. Chair's recommendation is to move this forward, as is. Any questions or comments? Nothing. Go ahead.

HB2335, HD1 recommendations to pass, unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations adopted.

The next item on Our agenda is HB2360 HD1 related to paid family leave. We do have some amendments that we will be suggesting for an HD2 on page 16. We just want to blank the employee counts. It's currently listed as 30.

What we would do is blank that count and we would insert language into the Committee report requesting some analysis from the Administration and advocates on kind of Right. Sizing who we would subject this new language to. Whether it's 30 or 50 or 20, anything would be helpful so that it doesn't feel as arbitrary.

And then maybe potentially also the prospect of an implementation of some sort of credit or subsidy for small businesses who would be not mandated to follow but who would potentially opt in. So I think that would be good going forward as we continue to flesh some of this stuff out.

Members, do we have any questions or comments on this measure? Yeah, go ahead.

Thank you. Yeah. To my colleagues, thank you for such excellent questions and the responses from DLI are I think my largest heartburn right now is the conflicts and the gap. The especially with that Arista piece. Absolutely. To tailor this. But I really want some answers and we'll be helping with reservations on this.

Thank you. That's a comments and thank you everybody for the testimony there. I came into this Bill with a lot of concerns. Many of them were put to rest by testimony. So especially HK D lir did bring up some very crucial questions that I have as well. So I'll be voting wr. Thank you. Repo.

I share my colleagues reservations so I'll be working with reservations.

Reservations. Anyone else? Rep. Hartsfield and then Rep. Miyake.

I share similar concerns as well. So I also will be voting with reservations.

Okay. Rep. Miyake.

Thank you, Chair. I will be also voting with reservations just based off of DLIR's testimony and my concerns are with the ERISA legal analysis. Sure. Replenish. Okay.

Anyone else? Reservations? Okay, go ahead.

Members voting on HB2360 HD1 recommendation is to pass with amendments. No noting reservations for Reps. Hartsfield, Keohokapu-Lee Loy, Miyake, Perruso, Alcos and Gedeon. Any other reservations? Rep. Reyes Oda. Any other reservations? Any no votes recommendations? Adele?

All right, thank you very much. Next we have HB2387 HD1 relating to workers compensation medical benefits. I believe there's a. There was a technical thing that was brought up earlier but I believe it was addressed in a prior draft. So I think we're okay. So the Chair's recommendation would be to move this forward as is.

Any questions or comments? Seeing None. Go ahead.

HB2387 HD1 recommendations to pass. Unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Next we have HB2472 HD1 relating to the Hawaii Employer Union Health Benefits Trust Fund Staff salaries. Chair's recommendation is to move this forward as is. Any questions or comments? Seeing none.

HB2472 HD1 recommendations to pass unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes. Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. On HB 1805 HD1 relating to child welfare, the Chair's recommendation will be to move this forward as is. I think we may have a question or two. Rep. Hartsfield.

I have a comment. Chair. Thank you. I was hoping that the Department of Attorney General would have been present so I could ask the question question. But they were not. Initially I was going to vote no. However, I'm going to vote with reservations for the following reasons.

The testimony and opposition, as well as the testimony provided by the Department of the Attorney General. Excuse me. Is consistent in that it does not recommend that the Office of Child Advocate be within within an existing or an attached state agency and that a new chapter instead should be created. And so.

And also the Department of Human Services, which is what child welfare is under, did not provide testimony. So I'm hoping that as this bill moves forward, we will get more testimony and discussion so that this bill can be better fleshed out. So I'll be voting with reservations instead. Thank you. Chair.

Members, anything additional? Seeing none.

HB 1805 HD1 recommendations to pass, unamended. Noting reservations for Representative Hartsfield. Any other reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations adopted.

Thank you very much. We have HB2469 HD1 relating to a regular session review working group. Chair's recommendation is to move this forward as is. Are there any questions or comments? If not, please share for the vote.

HB2469 HD1 recommendations to pass unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations adopted.

Now move on to a lot of culture and arts measures. HB 1815 HD1 relating to the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts. The Chair's recommendation is to move this forward as is. Any questions or comments? Seeing none. Vice Chair.

Voting on HB 1815 HD1 recommendations to pass, unamended. Any reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations adopted.

Next we have HB 1860 HD1 reservation relating to the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra. Chair's recommendation would be to move this forward as an HD2 blanking out the appropriation and making a minor relatively non substantive correction in the preamble. That's sufficient. Any necessary technical amendments? Also Members. Any questions for this Measure? Vice Chair.

HB 1860 HD1 recommendations to pass with amendments. Any reservations? Any no votes? Recommendations documented.