House Standing Committee on Finance

Hello everyone. We are opening our 10am Wednesday, March 42026 agenda here for the Committee on Finance. Here we are in conference room 308. Before we get started, if you're on Zoom, please stay muted until called upon. We do a two minute time limit on individual testimony so that we can best accommodate everyone.

You know, I think it is worth noting before we get started, we have a number of items on the agenda. We are running up against some deadlines. So as much as possible, if we can summarize briefly or stand on testimony, that would be appreciated. But if you feel the need, you know, go do your thing.

We're going to open up with HB 2459 HD2 relating to the Food and Product Innovation Network. First up, we have the Department of Health in support.

Good morning, Chair Todd and Members of the Committee. My name is Michael Burke. I'm with the Hawaii State Department of Health, Food and Drug Branch. We submitted written testimony in support. We stand on our written testimony and I'm available for questions. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next, we have the Hawaii Chamber of Commerce in support.

Good morning.

Thank you. We have the Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

Thank you. Chair Brian Miyamoto. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on original testimony in support.

Thank you very much. Next we have the Agribusiness Development Corporation in support.

Room. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, I'm Wendy Gady, the Executive Director for the Agribusiness Development Corp. I want to start by saying thank you for the position of the Climate Resilient Food and Product Innovation Network Manager last year. Here she is. She's the one that's going to make this act happen. The act is about job creation, it's about developing our tax base and it's about meeting our food mandates. We're here for any questions.

Thank you very much. I think those are the only testifiers who indicated they'd be here or on Zoom today. Are there any other individuals who would like to testify either in person or on Zoom? Anyone on Zoom? No. If not, we do have, I think another five or six organizations and individuals in support.

Members, do you have any questions? Comments? No? Okay, we're going to move on to the next item on our agenda. We're going to have HB 1616 HD1 relating to agriculture,

Department of Agriculture and biosecurity with comments.

That stands our testimony offering comments.

Thank you. Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

Hawaii Farm Bureau stands on written testimony in support and intent.

Thank you, Members. Additional testimony from one individual in support. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on zoom?

Members, any questions on this measure? Seeing none, we're going to move on to HB 1799 HD1 relating to the counties.

We have the sitting county of Honolulu, Department of Housing and Land Management in support. That's everyone who indicated to be joining us today. Members also testimony and support or support from the Border Water Supply and one organization as well as testimony in opposition from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on zoom?

Thank you. Members, questions on this measure? Seeing none. We're going to move on to HB 1604 HD2 relating to agricultural workforce housing.

We have the Chamber of Commerce, Hawaii in support. Thank you. Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii Farmers Union and support on Zoom. Not present. Okay, that's everyone who indicated they would be joining us. Also comments from the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, support from the Office of Hawaiian affairs as well as three organizations and one individual. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on zoom?

Okay, Members, questions on this measure. If not, we're going to move on to our next Bill. We have HB 1732 HD2 relating to housing.

Okay. Department of Taxation with comments.

Gary Suguma for Department of Taxation. The Department stands on its written comments.

Thank you. Tax foundation of Hawaii with comments on zoom.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Tom Yamachika from Tax Foundation. We'd be happy to stand in our comments and meet when we hear for questions.

Thank you. We have Holomula Collaborative and support on zoom.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, my apologies for not attending in person today. I had a family emergency come up and I'm working from home this week.

My name is Matt Krelberg and I am testifying on behalf of Holomua Collaborative, a local nonprofit dedicated to advocating for solutions for making Hawaii affordable for local working residents so they do not need to move to the continent.

You have our written testimony and you're all acutely aware of the cost of living crisis and housing crisis facing our neighbors. So I'm not going to reiterate the importance of why we need to examine new and innovative solutions to keep our local working families here rather than in Las Vegas or the Pacific Northwest.

One factor that forces our local families to move to the continent is the lack of supply and the increased cost of housing that is driven up due to out of state buyers. With Hawaii being Hawaii, there's always going to be interest from those not from here and buying property.

And despite the occasional suggestion unconstitutional to bar out of state folks from purchasing homes. However, this Bill does provide a new solution around that problem. The central feature of the Kamaaima Homes Program would be to establish a state and county partnership that can begin to create a permanent supply of local of homes for local working residents.

In exchange for a down payment or for the assistance to construct an ADU, residents would voluntarily agree to place a deed restriction on their home that runs in perpetuity for the land, ensuring that the home and if applicable, the ADU that is purchased with funds as well, is occupied by folks who live and work in Hawaii.

This Bill, when combined with other housing efforts being pursued by HHFDC, the counties and community groups, can help keep our families home. And we do urge your support. I am available for any questions you may have. Mahalo.

Thank you. We have Limby Hawaii in opposition on zoom.

Sorry folks, had to unmute myself there. Aloha. My name is Makana. I am testifying on behalf of Limby Hawaii. Limby Hawaii is a concerned group of Kamaaina and Kanaka who are advocating for affordable housing solutions. In General. You would think we would love this Bill. We basically have arrived on the solution of deed restrictions in perpetuity.

But we think this Bill, as evidenced by its model program in Vail, just really shows how you can sound like you have the right idea and execute it terribly. So I'll just talk a little bit about what's happened in Vail, which the Bill cites prominently.

The preamble of this Bill may have led you to believe that Vail's indeed program was a big success with around 1000 units produced. In fact, it's far lower than that. It's a maximum of 178 that were in Vail. Indeed, of those units, only 30 are owner occupied. The remainder are used as rentals or owned by corporations.

So not exactly conducive to Kamaina to model a Bill on that program. The units that are owner occupied, there's some big concerns with affordability. I'll just highlight two instances that show how this Bill won't actually make affordable housing. So in one case, there was a home that was bought for 727,000 doll in 2019.

Vail Town then invested 127,000 for the exact sort of deed restriction that is being proposed in this Bill. And then in 2022, so only three years later, that same home was sold for 1.2 million. So this sort of deed restriction doesn't actually do anything in terms of affordability.

If you look at the rental side of things, again, because affordability is not required, they're not actually affordable. So Vail again purchased deed restrictions in some condos that were put up for rent. Those rental prices are about double what the market median is despite the deed restriction requiring that no it's rented to local folks.

If you just require that it's rented to someone who works here, you are not actually requiring that it's rented to a local family despite the name of the Bill. In fact, if you look at census data, 80% of families that move here.

So whether or not they're from here, 80% of families that move here would immediately qualify for this Bill.

So I would urge you folks to actually question the advocates of this Bill on what they think the affordability will be, who they think this Bill is targeted at and whether they can point to their model program again in Vail and see those same results because they cannot. Thank you and that we stand on our end testimony.

Thank you. Okay, that's everyone who indicated they would be joining us today. Members also testimony and support from HHFDC. Support from from Council Member Khaldin of the Kauai County Council, Council Member Kagiwata from the Hawaii county council.

Comments from one organization as well as support from 11 organizations and six individuals and opposition from two additional organizations and one individual. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoo

Members questions on this measure?

No, sorry. Is HHFCC actually not here? Okay, just saying that that's actually very disappointing that I did have questions for how this program was going to be administered since we would be investing not a small amount of money, about $20 million a year for this. But I will follow up with them separately.

Thank you Rep. Hussey

Okay, thank you. At the same point that I wanted to raise is rep talking. So it is, it is quite a large amount of money that we're talking about here. But can I'd like to ask some questions to h if they could come onto the Zoom for a minute.

Aloha Representative.

Thanks for, thanks for being here. Virtually would you know like for instance Amazon has an office here here. I think Palantir has an office here. Would those qualify as local companies in terms of the way that this Bill is constructed currently?

The exact language in the Bill does require that a to qualify as a business within the Bill you have to I believe be registered with the state, be paying GEP and have physical location. So yes, Amazon would be the organizations that would qualify.

Which from my perspective if you consider the number of local workers and families and people from here that are our Amazon delivery drivers, folks who may work at Walmart or at long are folks that are intended to be included by this.

Yeah, that makes sense. And how long would someone have to be in Hawaii in order to qualify for this program?

Currently, if I recall correctly in the Bill there are no residency requirements and a version of this Bill that had residency requirements, specific timeline residency or requirements in the past the AG did raise concerns with. We have seen residency preferences allowed out of I believe a lottery type program in Washington D.C. but putting an actual requirement on residency and term of how long you've lived here. The AG has in fact in the past raised concerns about constitutionality of that.

Okay, I don't know too much about Vail Colorado but you know apparently your organization does. Do you have any data on, you know how beneficial this this program has been in Vail? The the price of need restriction homes in Vail versus non restricted homes.

I don't have exact data right now, but I can pull some of it to get you like exact numbers. I will say that Vail isn't the only place where programs like this have worked and seen success. Cape Cod has shown similar programs. I believe Jackson Hole, Wyoming, Truckee, California which is right outside of California.

A lot of the places that have chosen to implement a program such as this are places that are tourist influenced or tourist focused economies. Nowhere has tried to do it at a state or this would be potentially just a county level. I do know that the county of Kauai is currently looking into this.

Maui has looked into it a little bit. And one of the things about Vail that we see are similar to Hawaii, although this program is different from what Vail currently does, is that Vail if you look at it on a map and you notice that all the area surrounding Vail is either national park or state park.

So it's places that actually cannot be where you can't continue to build.

So like Hawaii with the ocean preventing us from further build, there are actual physical building limit limit restrictions or limitations on what wherein you can where you can cannot put your housing and what similar to Hawaii, what Vail was experiencing was an influx of out of state or out of town purchasers coming in and then the workforce not having anywhere to actually work.

So that is the primary focus of this is for workforce housing.

To answer your other question representative, the numbers that we have heard from the folks are Vail generally early on where they were seeing a decrease in kind of a secondary housing market created that the homes that were deed restricted through this and through other government programs were at a lower price than the standard market housing costs.

We have heard from the folks from Vail recently that that has teetered out a little bit due to increased the interest rates that people just generally aren't buying homes as much, period, which is something we are also currently seeing in Hawaii. But exact numbers on how much the market has been brought down,

the folks from Vail have told us a couple different things and I haven't seen brand new numbers in a little over a year, but I would be happy to look into those and get them to you.

Okay. Yeah. I guess my concern is if there's no. If it's basically you have to be here for like a year or something like that in order to qualify for, for this sort of program, then it's not a substantially enough like filter, you know, to, to just, you know, that's what people do now.

They'll just move here and come to, to work in a local company. I'm trying to understand the value, especially given that it's, it is a substantial public investment.

And I'm wondering, Matt, you know, how many people do you think will benefit from this program as you've constructed it versus how many people would benefit if we take the same amount of money and invest it directly into social housing or public housing?

The way I look at it is that this program works best in consort with all other programs that are out there. Social housing programs, what Hawaii Public Housing Authority is doing, other HHFDC programs. House Bill 1740, which would incentivize the development of deed restricted housing through the 201H program through the China Community Land Trust.

Every program is a little different in design to who is going to access it and how folks are going to get involved in it. And even current HHFDC restrictions that require residents, you know, they can't prevent someone from just moving in and living here for X amount of time and try and qualify through HHFDC.

Our perspective on this bill in particular is that the workforce housing requirements that are a part of this and then the cultural insights and even the county requirement for having the counties involved with the negotiations is that that is how we're going to be able to weed out the bad actors that may try to take advantage of a program such as this.

Thank you for your responses. Appreciate it.

Thank you, Representative.

Thanks. Members, additional questions? If not, we're going to move on to HB 1736, relating to animal control.

We have the Department of Taxation with comments.

The department stands on its written comments.

Thank you. Department of Land and Natural Resources in support.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Finance Committee. My name is Patrick Chee. I'm from the Department of Land and Natural Resources and the Hawaii Invasive Species Council. We support this bill and we stand on our testimony.

I do want to point out that the Department of Land and Natural Resources has worked hard to work with animal welfare organizations in order to come up with a balanced bill or a balanced language, working with legislators in order to try and make sure that all these parties come and can support it.

We want more affordable spay and neuter in order to reduce the overpopulation of cats on the landscape, which would definitely benefit a lot of our conservation interests. So we also, in the last round of amendments, we support the declaration that has been added on as a means to keep track of the intact cats that are coming into the state. If you have any questions, I'm here. Thank you.

Thank you. We have the Hawaiian Humane Society in support on Zoom.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Stephanie Kendrick with the Hawaiian Humane Society. I want to echo Patrick's comments. This really has been a joint effort between animal welfare and conservation to try and come up with some steps that we can take together to help to reduce the number of cats who are living outdoors.

You have our testimony in strong support of this bill. I wanted to address a couple of the points of opposition. For the folks who are concerned that this bill in any way impedes ongoing trap neuter return efforts, it does not. It simply says that these additional new funds cannot be used for that purpose.

Hawaiian Humane supports TNRM. We will continue to find other funding sources to support those efforts. The sponsors made it clear that this bill is not one of those vehicles.

But we support it absolutely for the greater good of providing spay neuter funding for pet dogs and for cats who are going to be adopted from living outdoors into homes or moved into sanctuaries. I would urge the committee to keep this moving.

There's been some misinformation on social media in the last couple of days that's gotten some of the cat folks upset about this bill. But I believe if it keeps coming going, I can do some outreach that will mitigate those concerns. Regarding the objections of folks who want to be bringing in cats to breed them in our state, this bill really demands very little of them.

It just says that you need to register, you need to declare that you have an intact cat. You need to pay a small one time fee so that that paperwork is on record and we know who has these intact animals.

It does not prevent them from keeping the breeds that they love. So I would really urge the committee to support this as a joint effort of animal welfare and conservation and keep this measure moving. Thank you for your time, and I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. We have the American Bird Conservancy in support on Zoom.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Grant Sizemore from American Bird Conservancy in strong support of the bill. You have our written testimony. I'm also standing in support today on behalf of a number of organizations.

Archipelago Research and Conservation, Hallux Ecosystem Restoration, Hanalei Watershed Hui, Hui ʻĀina, Kauai Albatross Network, Friends of Kauai National Wildlife Refuges, and the Wildlife Society Hawaii Chapter. I appreciate the opportunity to speak, and I'm available for questions. Mahalo.

Thank you. The Cat Fanciers of Hawaii Cat Club in opposition on Zoom. Not present. We have Animal Rights Hawaii in opposition on Zoom. Animal Rights Hawaii on Zoom. Not present. Okay. We have the Hawaii Audubon Society in support on Zoom. Not present. Pacific Pet Alliance in opposition.

Chair Todd and the Members of the Finance Committee. My name is Lynn Muramaru. I represent the Pacific Pet Alliance, which focuses on animal welfare issues through education and advocacy. Our position on this bill is that we are in opposition, but we do have suggested amendments. Okay. We totally support the funds for spay neuter.

We totally support the conservationist position. You know, we have no objection to that section. What we do object to is the, what we feel is unfair targeting of the pedigree cat fancy. The cat fancy in Hawaii is very small. Okay, maybe about between the two CFA cat clubs, they have about 50 members in the entire state.

Out of that, roughly only about 10 of them breed pedigree cats. And they tell me that when they sell kittens as pets, you know, it's in their contract that these cats be spayed or neutered. Because an intact cat, I'm told, I'm really a dog person. But an intact cat, I'm told, is very difficult to live with. So they highly encourage spay and neuter. Okay.

The cat shows. The last cat show drew an entry of about 70 cats. And they said Hawaii was kind of unique in that more than half of their total entry was already spayed or neutered, you know. And they also have a household division so that anybody adopting a cat from the Humane Society or some other rescue is allowed to show their cat at the show.

So they, so out of those 70 cats, I believe about 10 of them were entered in the household division. So you're really talking about a very, very small population of people. We already pay a lot of money to bring animals into Hawaii.

We spend like on average about $350, $400 just to do the FAVN test, that's the rabies titer test. And then we're charged a fee to come into the state, and we already declared to the Department of Agriculture our name, our address, the microchip number.

And so can we start to wrap up please?

Yeah. So you know, in general, we would ask that you please delete that section because to charge us an additional hundred dollars fee for information that pretty much already provided is redundant. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Thank you. We have Duane Inoue in opposition.

I stand in strong opposition to the bill.

Stand in strong opposition to the bill. As stated in my written testimony. There's a lot of ambiguity in this bill. For example, the purpose of the bill is to reduce pet overpopulation. Yet the purpose of this bill is to reduce cat free roaming cats. The definition of pet includes dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, pigs and certain birds.

Based on Hawaii revised statute, we need to specify that this is going to be passed. It's only for cats and require annual reporting such as number, sterilized sex of animals, final deposition, adoption, sanctuary, return, euthanasia and the associated veterinary services provide provided. The bill says associative veterinary care but that could mean euthanasia.

We don't know if it's going to be used for sterilization. We need some definite reports after this bill is passed. The other issue I have is there's about more than 15 trap neuter return and Trap Neuter Return Management Organization in Hawaii and they've neutered thousands of cats.

In fact, within a month a thousand cats were neutered by pet fix. In four days they neutered a thousand cats. Now if those cats cannot be returned to the environment, what are you going to do with them? Cat shelters, there's not enough room in cat shelters. So the only solution is euthanasia.

In year 2000 there were estimated 12,000 euthanasia in Hawaii. That was before pretty large scale sterilization programs. The year 2005 it was reduced to 10,000. That's when early TNR expansion started. This year or last year it's estimated 2,300 to 2,500 cats.

We appreciate your testimony, but if you could summarize.

So I stand on my written testimony. If you would look at it and really consider it, I would appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Amanda Little in opposition, That is everyone who indicated they would be joining us today. Additional comments from the Department of Budget and Finance as well as support from 11 organizations and 69 individuals. Opposition from 7 organizations and 30 individuals and 4 additional individuals providing comments.

Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Please can you just state your name for the record before you begin?

So good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Finance Committee. My name is Emma Shelley. I've grown up on Oahu and I now work in conservation. I'm a cat parent myself. But there's really no denying when you work in conservation the impacts that roaming cats have on our native wildlife.

This includes unsterilized free roaming cats, whether they're pets allowed to wander, pets that got out accidentally or true Feral cats, they all contribute to the overpopulation that we're seeing and the pet crisis here on the islands.

And that in turn leads to more predation on our native birds, more toxoplasmosis in our watersheds and our communities, and then also more cats born into Colonies, and they have reduced lifespans, more injury and disease risk, and just a poor quality of life. So sterilization is a humane veterinary procedure.

It will go a long way to address this cat overpopulation crisis that we're facing on the islands. And it's only really good for communities, our native wildlife, and the cats themselves. So mahalo. Thank you very much.

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

Yes, please.

Oh, hi. Please just state your name for the record and you may proceed.

Aloha. My name is Aisha Aoki. I am the Vice President of the Cat Fanciers Association. I did submit testimony in opposition to this bill. So I have some background on there that anyone can read at a later time.

I do stand in strong opposition of this bill, but I wanted to add that we, as a club, or just also for my own personal input, we would support the spay and neuter funding of this bill if the age restriction and declaration stipulations were removed.

The main issue is not that people have intact cats, it's their inability to access and pay for the sterilization process.

Therefore, we feel that, you know, funding veterinarians and spay and neutered programs directly, possibly holding more events or holding events closer to these low income and rural areas would help more and bringing the solution to the people who need it most. You know, there's also people who don't have the transportation or access to these programs.

So, you know, usually they're in that low income category and who don't have the funds to pay for these surgeries. And therefore with that, you know, they won't also have the funds to pay for these high fines. And, you know, tracking every single unfixed cat is not the importance, nor is it feasible.

Getting funding directly to veterinarians and the these programs is, you know, possibly the key to all this and amending the bill to strictly just the spay neuter funding without these age restrictions and intact cat declarations. You know, there's already programs in place for those low cost spay and neuter programs. So they just need that funding support.

And we're hoping that, you know, given these supports in place, will maybe also help motivate or incentivize private veterinarians. To jump in and help with this with this process as well. So again, if the stipulations are removed, we will support it. However, as is, we do not support this bill and oppose it. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else on Zoom.

Members, any questions on this item? No. See none. We're going to move on to the next item on our agenda which should be HB 1736. We're moving on HB 1931 HD2 relating

to agriculture, Department of Land and Natural Resources and Support.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, it's Patrick Chi. Again with the Department Land and Natural Resources and the Hawaiian Mesa Species Council. We support this Bill because the Noctrus weed list has not been updated since 1992. And it is important that the noxious weed list be updated on a regular basis.

And we believe this Bill and the funding of a noxious weed list manager would definitely help it to become more regularly updated and be more up with the times. There are actually some plants on the list that currently are unfortunately more widespread anyway, so it makes sense that we would delist some of those and add new ones.

That would be our targets or the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity is target. So here for any questions, if you have any.

Thank you, Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. Thank you. Big Island Invasive Species Committee and support on Zoom. Not present. Not present. Hawaii Farm Bureau in support.

The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony. In support.

Thank you. Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species, CGaps and Support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, my name is Stephanie Easley with the Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species. We really want to thank you for hearing this Bill today have the potential to move forward. We are so excited about something going on with invasive plants in the state.

The original noxious weed statute and administrative rules are from the 1950s. They were very actively used in the 1950s. They were amended. The rules were amended multiple times. Three times in 1958 alone, then not again until 1978 and 1992 and then nothing. Since then.

The agricultural production and practices in the state and the way that we need to address invasive species have moved. Invasive plants have moved on since the 1950s. The noxious plan program has not moved with them.

This Bill provides support for the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to take this kind of mothball program from the early 90s and reinvigorate it on a transparent and ongoing annual basis. It's not just one heavy lift. They have to figure out how to modernize it. After all, these decades.

And we really think that this could be the way forward to try to get something going on at the state level with invasive plants. With respect to definitions, very limited distribution and limited distribution are terms that might be different for different types of plants, like a ground cover or grass versus a tall woody species.

And not having those definitions solidified in statute allowing flexibility to apply to different characteristics of the plants makes a lot of sense to us. We did have the chance to read other testimony and we think some of the points may be raised by dab about things that are missing from the statute could be addressed in administrative rules.

And there is a provision in the act for making those rules. So we really hope you support this Bill. Thank you again for hearing it. I'm here if you have any questions.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they would be joining us today. Additional testimony and support from seven organizations and 40 individuals. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Okay, Members, questions? Seeing none. Moving on to HB772HD1 relating to campaign

Finance.

Campaign spending commission and support on Zoom. Thank you. We have Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action and Support on Zoom.

Aloha. Aria Juliet Castillo testifying on behalf of Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action in strong support of HB 772. This bill closes a loophole that allows campaign funds to be used for tickets to other candidates fundraisers in lieu of making a straightforward campaign contribution. We recognize this practice has become very popular in Hawaii politics.

Many of you have generously donated to your colleagues fundraisers and many of you have benefited from that support. Whether it's a two affirm relationships, uplift freshmen or support a new candidate. We understand why you participate. But what may have started as a dinner ticket to show support has evolved into something very different.

Campaign funds are being used to max out donations between candidates through events that function more like money transfers than fundraisers. When campaign money circulates between candidates this way, it stops looking like participation and starts looking like the public can't quite follow this year's campaign contributions. Many reports offer a telling example.

An influential lawmaker made $1,000 donations to each of freshmen and two senior incumbents. The very next day those same incumbents turned around and donated thousand dollars to same freshmen. This reality is exactly why the reform is necessary. As details continue to emerge, we are learning that more than $100,000 in contributions connected to.

Tonight, the lobbyists under federal investigation for bribery move through dozens of campaigns, many of your own. When money connected to these kinds of individuals moves through campaign webs, it becomes increasingly difficult for the public to see where the influence begins and ends. HB772 is a simple step towards restoring trust.

If candidates want to support their colleagues, they absolutely can. But that can be done through their own personal money, not through campaign funds. This reform will cost nothing. It changes very little about how campaigns operate and removes one more reason for the public to question the integrity of how political money moves through the system.

Thank you so much for hearing this Bill. Please support HB772.

Thank you. We have Huli Pack and support on Zoom.

Aloha Chair Todd, Members of the Committee, my name is Christina. I'm testifying on behalf of Huli Pack and strong support of HB772. This bill does one simple thing. It stops candidates from using their campaign donations to buy tickets to other candidates. Fundraisers.

Most donors don't even realize and do not consent to their money which they donated to candidate A being turned around and donated to candidate B. If a candidate wants to support a colleague or another up and coming candidate, they should participate just like the rest of us with their own personal funds.

Another issue with this kind of campaign donation is that big money interests have an opportunity to influence lawmakers, but in a way that is invisible to the public. For example, I received a mailer paid for by the Tobacco Free Kids Action Fund promoting my representative and stating that she does not take money from Big Tobacco.

And that on its own is awesome. However, when I looked through the public filings, I found that other elected officials who do take large sums of money from Big Tobacco and their own lobbyists to use their campaign funds to buy fundraiser tickets to my representatives fundraisers.

And this illustrates that once the money passes through another candidate's account, the original source becomes invisible. A candidate can claim clean hands while still benefiting from exactly the kind of money they say they reject. This is not an isolated case to my representative.

Civil Beat has reported that $386,038 was transferred between campaigns during the 2024 election cycle alone. This Bill closes that loophole. Campaign funds belong to the campaign they were raised for and nothing else. This Committee doesn't need to worry about any fiscal impact as this Bill costs taxpayers nothing. It simply makes this rule clear.

So Hulipac urges you to support HB772. Thank you.

Thank you. That's all. The end. That's all the individuals who indicated to be joining us today. Testimony. Additional Testimony. Support from four organizations, 46 individuals, one individual in opposition, and one providing comments is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom Members questions?

Moving on to HB2153. I think that's one HD1.

Department of Law Enforcement and support.

Good morning Chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members. My name is Ernest Rubello. I'm a Deputy Director for the Department of Law Enforcement. I'm here on behalf of Director Mike Lambert. We did submit written testimony in support of this Bill. And what I like to just highlight is that the Daily respectfully urges the Committee to pass this bill.

The Department needs this money in order to retain some of our more seasoned and experienced officers to maintain continuity of of necessary operations. We realized that during these tough economic times, fiscal impact is very important.

So I wanted to highlight that if this Bill were to pass for fiscal year 20262027 the impact of the state would be $5,040,000. For a year 27 to 28, it would be $5,490,000. And then for 28-29, it would be $5,940,000. The three year total will come to $16,470,000.

Well, I realize that seems like a lot of money. Our state sheriffs have been working for many years at a very low pay scale and benefit package.

To compare us to a comparable county agency such as HBD, for example, who is a much larger agency, I get they are currently in 2026 going to pay all their employees or sworn officers $1,800 as a retention bonus.

There is a proposal now with HPD to offer a $5,000 a year bonus for 5 years with officers 25 plus or more years of service. They're also giving hiring incentives.

And to put this in context, a friend of mine who is now with HPD said his son who just graduated from high school, is 18 years old, just signed on as a police cadet and will be making $75,000 a year, $75,000 a year without a college degree.

In three years, they're going to stagger payments of $25,000 to this individual. And it's so hard to compete and to keep our season and officers when our pay disparity, our benefits package is at such a low end of the spectrum.

So we appreciate whatever you folks can do and we understand that money is tight, but this would greatly help our Department. So thank you for this opportunity.

Thank you. We have UPW with comments. Not present. That's everyone indicating they'd be joining us today. Also testimony and support from the judiciary, comments from Department of Budget and Finance Opposition from the Office of Collective Bargaining and comments from the Office of Information Practices. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Thank you. Members questions? Rep. Kusch.

Thank you for DLE. Yes sir. Thank you for coming out today. You know this three year pilot program to help recruit and retain officers. I know the state has been adding kind of duties to DLE as a new Department Department and so there's this race to kind of catch up with all these duties.

Can you kind of outline some of the roles that you fulfill as DLE that are maybe unique compared to the county police departments?

Well one, we just started this or we're reaching or going to start developing agricultural and law enforcement where we're going to go out to the rural areas and enforce agricultural crimes. And unlike the county agencies, we have to do law enforcement duties on all the islands, all the counties.

So with limited staff resources that spreads us really thin. We also are pushing since the insemination of our Department to become more like a true law enforcement agency.

Getting away or in addition to our security duties at the harbors, airports and the ports, also patrolling areas around the capitol or state properties, handling all criminal activities and then also pursuing convictions or pursuing criminal prosecution in these cases.

So we are asking a lot of our deputies that weren't initially part of their duties and we have now started to have to repurpose or do job redo job descriptions and stuff to incorporate these new ask.

And the pay has been relatively low and all we ask is for some pay parity or at least some incentives that we can use to entice these guys to do more while working under these, you know, staffing shortages and infrastructure concerns.

Our county counterparts are experiencing the same concerns and we see them offering very lucrative bonuses, incentives that are not only trying to retain their guys, but sadly it's also taking away our guys to go for the higher incentives.

So we're seeing not only mainland agencies rate our employees, but we're also seeing our own county agencies rating our employees.

So you've actually experienced deales, experienced some loss of employees that have been trained, brought up to speed, who are out and then are recruited by other agencies.

Yes. So I'll give you an example. I've only been with the deal since April of last year when I retired from the Hollow Police Department. We've had to rec or we've had one recruit class and now we're on our second recruit class. We I've doubled the, the recruitment allotment. So we had nine.

The last recruitment class we've had we have 19 plus. We're also training one tax Department investigator. Almost every application that I reviewed and vetted, they all had applied to HPD prior or had multiple applications to hbd, were not accepted, but we're able enough to meet our criteria to become a deputy sheriff.

What happens is as they get trained and they become more proficient and they get more experienced, they quickly then go reapply at HPD for the higher wages, the higher benefits, and they get accepted and they leave us. So we're kind of like a junior college, and HPD is like a major university.

They get training and experience from us, and they move to a better. And I can't say I blame them with the benefits and some of the stuff that's being offered by the county agencies. I have a family, too. I have responsibilities to my family. We have no choice.

But, you know, I mean to say, bid farewell to them, but it is critically affecting our operational infrastructure and our ability to do all the tasks that we're being asked. In addition to the new tasks. Fireworks Task Force, for example, safer watch with Waikiki, security concerns at the courthouses, at the Capitol, et cetera.

Thank you so much. I appreciate you answering the questions.

Thank you. Anything else? Oh Morikawa

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Thanks for this opportunity.

Can you come back? I just wanna. Sure. I wanna know if there is any differences in the training programs with the Police Department and with you guys. I'm sorry, the training programs to become police officer, is it comparable? What are the differences?

Oh, so when we first came over here, we. We thought it'd be a drastic difference, but we were pleasantly surprised that they were still getting quite a bit of training and subject matter. I think the problem that the daily was having was just infrastructure concerns. They don't have a dedicated training facility.

They don't have a dedicated dojo or track. We are not working on toward or trying to secure that. And then fortunately, Director Lambert was a major at the Trading Division, so he had or instituted a Kalea certified training program. We've taken all that material, we've crossed it over to daily, and we made like, a hybrid.

Now, so the training that the recruits get, starting with this class, is more geared towards, like, the HPD recruit class, which is more of a concern for us now. Right. Because they are now getting the same training as hpd.

So HPD has no problem taking our guys now because they know that they're basically getting the same training that they would have got from hpd. So it's more Incentive for them to want to raid or entice our guys away from us.

So what makes your sheriff's more attractive than police Department? Is it just a work schedule? I'm sorry, what makes a sheriff more attractive than being a police officer? You know, besides the pay, the training. I know for police officers now that I've been.

So I've been both. I've been HPD as well as dearly as sheriff. It's really one in the same. I think it's just perception. It's public. Public perception that HPD is a higher caliber law enforcement officer and that HPD has more resources and it's much more organized and disciplined.

But we are also bringing that culture to the DLE now. And so in a very short time, or if it hasn't already started, you'll start seeing very little differences between the two. I think it's just public perception.

So it's just a state police force versus a county police force.

Yes. And I think as we, if we're fortunate enough to get funding and, you know, assistance from the Legislature to get some of our bills passed and we get the resources we need, you'll soon see that DLE can be, I guess, parallel to hpd.

And pay is one of our biggest detractors and bonuses are one of our biggest detractors because who's going to come work for us at 55,000 when a cadet who's 18 years old gets 75? I get you on that.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, ma'am.

Go ahead for DL. Thanks for everything you do. You're welcome. Was seen or not of these step up, especially at our harbors and airports on. I was just really curious as far as overall time, percentage wise, how much time are you guys spending at airports and harbors, some around Department of Transportation.

And I'm asking that question because I'm just curious if there's ways to kind of cost share, make TOT funds into DLE for the time that you guys are covering our areas of transportation.

So that is one of the challenges is the funding. Because airport funding is pertinent to the airport, harvest funding is pertinent to the harbors.

So unlike HPD, where we, we can move people around based on who funded what, whose budget is paying for what, it limits our resources, meaning that the officers assigned to the harbors have to stay within the harbor parameters, airport deputies have to stay within the deputy parameters, judiciary deputies have to stay within the judiciary parameters.

Which makes it, as far as management goes, very difficult because if we have A shortage. It's hard to move people around because of these constraints. But in an emergency, of course we would freely move these resources to address the emergency. But on just a day to day basis it makes it very difficult.

But I can tell you this. Even with our limited staffing and shortages and our resources, we still provide at least a minimum level of security and public safety at all these facilities.

And that is a paramount concern for the Director to make sure that despite our inequities or deficiencies or limitations, that the public, the our stakeholders, everybody gets as much protection as they can be afforded under our current situation.

Great. Thank you. And thank you for taking on the CALEA training. I know that's a big plus for police Department and having those same stuff.

Yes, very. The CALEA training is very challenging because of our lack of resources and a lack of dedicated infrastructure. We currently use a mixed commercial building as our administrative offices, whereas the dle, I'm sorry, hpd, has a dedicated police station.

When I went up for Clare training in the mainland to the organization that certifies organizations, I was, I don't want to say I was shocked, but I was in awe of how much we are behind the curve as far as what we need. Like we don't even have a dedicated cell block.

I one time worked at the cell block at hpd and then to come over to the DLE and see that the infrastructure we have related to the cell block was so disheartening because we are so at a disadvantage currently that we really need to get up to speed as quickly as possible.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much.

Anything else? Great job. Next we're going to move on to HB2. I feel like this is the wrong thing. Okay. HB2122 HD1 or late in a teacher house.

First we have the Department of Education with comments. Thank you. Hawaii State Public Charter School Commission in support.

We have the Chamber of Commerce Hawaii in support. Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us today. Additional testimony in opposition from the Office of Collective Bargaining as well as six organizations and two individuals in support. One organization providing comments. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody answer

Members questions on this measure? Seeing none. We're going to move on to HB2009 relating to family caregiver support.

We have the Department of Human Services with comments on Zoom. Nope in person. Thank you.

Hawaii Disability Rights center in support not present. That's everybody who indicated they would be joining us. Also additional comments from the State Council on Developmental Disabilities and support from four organizations and 10 individuals. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

This is Nicole from Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks. We're one of the organizations that submitted testimony. Apologies for it to be late, but we support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, we have your testimony. Anybody else on Zoom.

Members, additional questions? Moving on to HB2012 HD1 relating to community literacy labs.

Have the Department of Education with comments.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee, Terry Ushijima testify on behalf of the Department of Education providing comments for this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. We have the Hawaii State Public Library System in support.

Mallory Fukutani for the state library system standing on our supporting the intent. Thank you.

Thank you. And Hawaii Literacy in support.

Hello, Chair. Vice Chair. Members of the House Committee on Finance. My name is Jill Takasaki Canfield. I'm with Hawaii Literacy. I'm testifying in support of this bill. Community based literacy initiatives are essential for improving literacy outcomes because they meet families where they are. Our agency, other community providers and the libraries are already trusted access points for learners.

We serve communities with the greatest need, supporting both youth and adults with reading, writing, English language learning and digital skills skills families need to succeed in school work and lear from our experience, place matters.

When literacy supports are located near where children live, participation goes up and barriers drop, especially for families navigating transportation, work schedules, language access and limited connectivity. That's why this the Community Literacy Lab model is very promising and exciting and strengthens literacy through coordinated community centered delivery.

Delivery that reflects the realities of communities it's meant to serve and builds on existing local capacity and strength. This approach is also cost effective. It leverages existing community spaces and trusted partners and concentrates resources where it can reach the most learners. Couple quick examples. Our family literacy libraries at the Towers at Kuhio Park.

Our staff partnered with Lina Pune elementary on an intensive tutoring effort that connected Keiki with support with and wraparound engagement for parents and caregiver caregivers. Also our adult literacy tutoring manager, in partnership with a longtime volunteer and librarian at the Molokai Library, are working together to expand one to one tutoring for adults on that island.

Hawaii urgently needs this type of investment in literacy. Without stronger literacy outcomes, we will not meet our education and workforce goals. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they would be joining us today. Additional testimony and support from one individual. Is anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom.

Members questions? Go ahead. Rep. Templo.

Thank you. Chair. Can I have a DOE, please? Hi. Thank you very much for being here today and thank you for offering comments on the measure. Do you guys by chance have programs that are dedicated for Title 1 areas when it comes to literacy?

So our schools that have title one.

This is Dr. Lauren Pedestri.

She's from our Office of Curriculum Instruction. Thank you. I always forget. Just start talking. Are schools that have Title 1 funding? They have the option to use some of that funding specifically for tutoring.

So we went ahead and we looked at all of our elementary schools that are Title one and we found that significantly more than half of them are providing on site tutoring in some form at their schools specifically using that Title 1 funding.

So it is an option that a lot of our schools are already Taking, and then they're localizing it to that school site.

So this is the same. Can I continue? So this is the same funding that's for the general. For all schools that are able to take this funding to access Title 1.

But. Yeah, exactly.

But is there anything specific for Title 1 schools only, like, extra supplemental help?

I think I might be misunderstanding your question. So our schools that qualify for Title 1 funding are those schools that are hitting that limited income threshold. So those are the schools, I think, that are targeted in the bill.

Is there any supplemental help for these Title 1 schools? Because you're saying that there are pools of money for general literacy programs. Correct. So I'm wondering if there's more supplemental Programs for title 1 Schools targeting literacy specifically.

So how they use the funding is that they are the ones that have that leeway. The funding goes directly to them in mass. And then they're able to say, I'm going to use this percentage for X, Y and Z.

And so the majority of our elementary schools are using some of that funding specifically for that supplemental, such as additional tutoring after school.

Does that make sense? And the Title 1 schools, they have to do a comprehensive needs assessment that looks specifically at their school data, and they use that for their planning purposes. So they need to have a plan that's approved, and they use that to determine what the highest priority of needs are.

And most of our schools do have tutoring as one piece of that. They also use some of their funding for family engagement. So they have some of them have reading nights with parents. They do book giveaways. But it really depends on what that school needs are.

And of course, they, you know, consider community and they carry out their plans.

Okay. So there are structured methods on how to address literacy for all schools? Very much so. Okay, thank you. Can I question the state library? Thank you.

Valerie Fujitani for State Library System.

Thank you for being here today. My question is, if funding were to go to the library, is this a project that the library can do, having some type of community literacy lab? Do you guys have, like, experience?

We do have. Offer some literacy classes as a part of our regular programming. If we were to do something broader, that would be at most libraries or, you know, a certain number of libraries in Title 1 areas. I think we would like to request some funding to support that right now.

We do provide literacy programs based on the programming capacity of our library staff. So if you. If it were to be a more dedicated program, we could certainly take it on.

But we would prefer to have a staff or person to focus on it and also to work with the DOE to find out what literacy programs they have implemented so that there's consistency for the participants.

Do you guys by chance have any experience with having some type of community literacy lab? I'm sorry, I won't. Like, do you guys have programs that you guys had that you've worked with DOE or nonprofits to help Title 1 areas? I'd have to get back to you on that.

I'm not sure if DOE is familiar, but I personally am not. But I can find out from the state library.

Does the library have a network of people or volunteers who could help if there were programs that would be implemented at the library off the top?

We did not do any research to do that, but I'm sure that we could partner with other agencies and find, you know, retired or student, some of the agencies that are noted in the Bill or groups of potential participants. We could certainly look at that if we were to manage our administer a program.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. No further questions. Thank you. Anything additional Committee. Okay, I'm gonna make a couple of quick announcements before we proceed. First is after HB2233HD1, which is the SNAP ED Bill, we're going to be taking about a 20 minute recess before we proceed on to HB in 1976.

The second thing is on these next two measures, HB 1779 and HB 2296, which are related measures to school meals. We do have a lot of testimony all in support. I just want to. The intent is to move things forward so you don't have to convince us.

We are running a little low on time and the longer it goes, the harder it is to process paperwork, which makes it harder to move the Bill. So just putting that out there. Next we have HB 1779 HD1, which is relating to school meals.

Department of Health with comments.

Good morning, Chair and Vice Chair and members of the committee. Department of Health stands on its testimony, offering comments. Thank you.

Thank you. Department of Education with comments on Zoom. In person.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and members of the committee. Sean Tajima, Assistant Superintendent, testifying on behalf of the Department of Education. The department stands on his written testimony that provides comments on this measure.

The department supports the intent of HB 1779 HD 1 to provide universal free school meals provided that the state fully subsidizes the substantial cost without affecting the governor's existing budget request.

Just to give a brief explanation of these additional costs, the obvious is the loss of sales of paid students who are currently eating lunch. That will total about $16 million. In addition to that, this year we received a non-recurring fund of $36 million to cover our deficit, so adding those two would be a total of $52 million in a recurring basis.

Other factors to consider is that school districts who have transitioned to universal free meals have shown an increase of a minimum of 10% meal participation. So that would result in, again, increased loss of sales. And increased meal participation is a good thing, but it does come at a cost, so we wouldn't be getting sales from those meals and it would increase the food cost as well. So estimating, would be about an increase of about $111 million for that. Other factors would be we get reimbursed for our meals.

So students who have free meals, we get reimbursed about $6 a meal. Paid status, we get reimbursed about 0.60 cents a meal. So if we had universal free meals, there wouldn't be any incentive for parents to submit free, reduced lunch applications, which would potentially decrease our reimbursement.

It wouldn't go down to zero because about 30% of our students would still qualify by direct certification, but right now it's at 50%. It could go down to about 30. Another factor is food costs. Our food costs will increase over the next several years with our goal to increase our locally sourced food to 30% by 2030. Thank you for this opportunity to testify. We stand by for questions.

Thank you. Hawaii State Public Charter School Commission, in support.

PJ Foehr, on behalf of Dr. Ed Noh, executive director of the State Public Charter School Commission. We stand in support or stand on our submitted testimony--excuse me--in support with comments and suggested language for HB 1779 HD 1.

Thank you. Hawaii State Youth Commission, in support on Zoom.

Aloha. The Hawaii State Youth Commission stands behind their written testimony and we respectfully urge the committee to pass this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii Public Health Institute, in support.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, and members of the committee. Nate Hicks, Hawaii Public Health Institute. Very excited to support this bill. I wanted to kind of reiterate what the Department of Education had said about the cost of current participations rate.

I think they said they would lose about $16 million in revenue and then they added on about $36 million in existing deficit on top of that bill, and I don't think that's relative to this bill because that's an existing deficit that's going to occur whether this bill passes or not.

So for current participation rate, 16 million is that figure. When we add on the increased participation rate, definitely we're going to have increased food costs. Based on the DOE meal report that came out in December, I think the food cost per meal is about $4.60.

With increased participation rate of about an additional 4 million meals, 4 million meals times $4.60 per meal is about $18 million for the increased participation rate, so when we take the 16 million for lost revenue, 18 million for increased participation rate, I think in total, we're closer to about 32, $33 million for free school meals for all in the 2029-30 school year.

I think, again, that's a little bit of a different picture than the 110 million that they're saying. Happy to discuss in more detail. As a former math teacher, I know a lot of these numbers came at you quick, but available for questions as well. I appreciate the opportunity to testify in support of this bill. Mahalo.

Thank you. We have testimony in support from the American Heart Association.

American Heart Association. We stand in strong support of our written testimonies.

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

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, and members of the committee. We support this bill. The one thing in my testimony is that we found a study looking at how much administrative savings would come from a bill like this, a law like this, and because when you serve all free meals, you can save money for every meal.

And the study found a savings of 0.67 cents per lunch and 0.58 cents per breakfast. So in addition to all the other reasons to have free meals, it actually makes the system smoother and run more efficiently. Thank you. Please pass this bill.

Thank you. We have testimony in support from Hawaii Hunger Action Network.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Genevieve Mumma, Hawaii Hunger Action Network. Just to keep it short, we just really want to emphasize that this would not be-- this bill would not be an immediate budget hit to this state.

So it's post-dated until 2030, and this upholds our five-year plan that Governor Green has even mentioned to achieve free school meals by 2030, and so there's ample time to plan and phase in the funding that's needed by school year 2029-2030, but mahalo so much and please pass this bill.

Thank you. Testimony in support from Hawaii Appleseed.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Daniela Spoto with Hawaii Appleseed. We are in strong support of this bill. We want to thank you also and just the Legislature in general for getting us part of the wave air last year with SB 1300, now Act 146, which extends free school meals to children up to 300% of the poverty level, which is about a living wage.

We recognize, though, that some kids are still going to fall through the cracks because it still requires an application. It requires verification of income. This bill, we really appreciate the inclusion of charter schools which were left out of the prior legislation as well, and also just echoing that this will not have a fiscal impact until the 2030 fiscal year, so that gives us some time to sort of ramp up and the department to work towards getting those systems in place.

We have some additional cost analysis that I think just supports some of what the DOE and some of our partners have also said. We've been working closely with the DOE on these numbers to sort of illustrate exactly how the costs are broken down and also looking at what a projected increase in participation might look like, so I'm also available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii Youth Food Council, in support on Zoom.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Vivienne Hill. I'm a student at UH, and I am testifying on behalf of the Hawaii Youth Food Council and also the Climate Future Forum's Regenerative Food Systems Working Group in strong support of this measure.

I stand on our submitted written testimony but would like to emphasize that youth in the council from across our state chose this as priority bill for us. We ask the committee to invest in students because nourished keiki learn better and stay in school longer. We strongly urge the committee to pass HB 1779. Mahalo.

Thank you. Hawaii Food Industry Association, in support on Zoom.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and members of the committee. I'm Alexis Chapman for HFIA. We stand on our testimony in support. Just want to highlight we are currently experiencing, this state, a food insecurity crisis. We're at 30% food insecurity statewide. In certain areas that is 40%. This measure is urgently needed at the moment. It should be an easy thing to say yes to. Is food for kids. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Noel Shaw, in support on Zoom.

Aloha, mai kakou. My name is Noel Shaw. I will stand by my written testimony that was submitted on behalf of myself and my ohana. We've been fortunate to be alongside a lot of these folks who are here today and all of the people who have left comments and comments again on free school meals bill and this-- needing it for all of us is necessary. I just want to emphasize a couple things.

The bill to ensure that we get more local foods in schools, that was started in 2017, so there's been time for the DOE to upscale and get ready for that transition in 2030 that this bill would align with as well at the same time, and it's just an amazing thing to increase the use of local food for feeding our keiki at school. My keiki are super grateful when they see something that comes from Hawaii on their plates and I know that other keiki are excited about that too.

Those are demonstrations of care and the cafeteria is just an extension of our home kitchens, and school is an extension of our home, so our continued investment in these places is super important. Mahalo and free school meals for all keiki.

Thank you. We have Joell Edwards, in support on Zoom.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, and members of the committee. Joell Edwards, Waimea resident, small-business owner, and community organizer on Kauai for HCAN. I stand by my written testimony, but I do have a few comments. Working families here in Hawaii often do not qualify for federal assistance programs on paper, yet they are struggling to cover the cost of groceries every week.

Parents are working long hours, multiple jobs, and still finding themselves making difficult choices, but most financial eligibility does not always reflect a child's lived reality. Just because a household may technically have the means to pay for lunch does not mean that every child consistently has access to food at home or they're being sent to school with lunches or money to pay for their lunches.

Some keiki experience instability or inconsistent care. At my small business, which is a local grocery store, we also serve as a school bus stop for many of our students in our rural community, and we started seeing firsthand the hunger that most of them experience before and after school, and as such, we now keep healthy snacks on hand for these students for that reason. I respectfully urge you to resport and listen to all the comments. Thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you. That's all-- that's everyone who indicated they would be joining us. Additional written testimony in support from 11 organizations and 70 individuals. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Please. Please just state your name for the record before you begin.

Aloha. My name is Cody Elazar, and I'm here to testify for HB 1779. My name is Cody Elazar, I'm a senior at Castle High School, and I wanted to share-- I know you guys are in support of this already, but I also wanted to share my story.

I have gotten those yellow slips that indicate that I have little to no money in my school lunch bank account, and it would be often where, in my first period, my teachers would give them to me. And during lunch lines, I would get my lunch taken away from me because I didn't have that much money in my account.

Giving students free school meals should not wait any longer, and it should be in effect immediately. With high cost of living here in Hawaii, the last thing a parent should be worrying about is if their child is getting fed at school. I strongly encourage you guys to pass this bill. Mahalos, and thank you guys for your time.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room?

Hi. I'm Keanu Naber. I'm from Castle High School. I'm a junior. I'm asking you guys to support the HB 1779. I'm lucky to have free meals, but some of my friends don't have free meals or reduced lunch.

They ask me to get them lunch sometime, and I feel bad that my friends have to ask me for lunch. I-- oh, my bad. Many families probably have to decide to put money in their account for lunch because they have to spend it on groceries or bills. That's why I'm asking you guys to please pass the HB 1779. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room? Oh. Yeah.

Aloha, members of the chair, committee. My name is Halia. I go to Castle High School, and I'm a senior, and my mom is a single mother, and if meals were free, it would really lift that weight off of my mom because she has to worry about all these bills and the high cost of living here in Hawaii. It would really help. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Tili Kahopi. I. So I'm lucky I'm one of the kids that do get free school meals, but unfortunately, I have three younger brothers, and they don't get it because we have different moms. So my dad and my stepmom was working five jobs in total.

So my stepmom was working three jobs, my dad was working two jobs just to put food on our table, and I see them constantly struggling. I ended up picking up a job on the weekends to help them, and so I just know that this-- this bill would help my family a lot. So I just please ask you guys to pass this bill.

Thank you.

Thank you.

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

Members, questions? Rep. Gedeon.

DOE. There's a lot of support for this bill. A lot of us think it's a good idea, myself included. My question is just, are there different programs or guidelines in place to help prevent waste of food, good food going in the trash?

So I'd like to turn over to Anneliese Tanner. She's our School Food Service Administrator.

There are currently no regulations around food waste. We are working very hard to revamp our menus to include student input in the menus that we are providing to educate around the local foods that we're providing. We will be moving next year into offering multiple choices at lunch so students can choose what they want instead of take what is provided. That should help with the food waste as well. I think as we move into a regional kitchen framework, we'll be able to save food waste on the back of house side as well as we begin to prepare in larger volume.

A couple of my constituents work at one of the elementary schools. It was one of the issues that they brought up to me. Some suggestions that they share with me: designating the table where students can put packaged food, you know, that's unopened. They don't want it, another student wants it. Do students currently have an option to say, like, I don't want that?

So currently in 2nd grade through 12th grade is what is called Offer Versus Serve in the food service world, and those students have the choice in many schools because the staff want to help move the students through the line very quickly. We have a practice of giving them everything on the plate, and so we are working on changing that practice to make sure that students are just taking the foods that they want to eat.

Other question, there was the talk about lost revenue. Are there other programs where the school kitchens can help generate revenue, whether they catering for, you know, baby's first birthdays or things like that?

So generally in food service, catering from the schools does not generate money. It's more of a service to provide to the department and to the community or for marketing so that folks understand the quality of food that we're providing. I think at this point, we're not in a position to do catering because we need to focus on increasing the quality of our meals and the skills so that we're fully scratch cook and local rather than expanding into a whole other industry segment.

Good point. Appreciate those comments. Like I said, I support the intent, I support the free meals. Anything we can do to cut down on waste on, you know, good food going into trash.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Additional questions? Seeing none, we're going to move on to HB 2296 HD 1, relating to school meals.

Department of Education with comments.

Vice Chair Members of the community Sean Tajima, Department of Education. The Department stands on his written testimony, provides comments on this measure.

The Department request that the Bill be reverted back to the original HB2296 with the current amendment changing the language so that the Department cannot charge more than 25% of the cost of the meal Department would be required to reduce the amount that is currently charging which would result in a larger financial burden for the state as a loss of revenue would be need to be supplemented by jungle funds. Stand by for questions. Thank you.

Thank you Hawaii Public Health Institute and support.

We stand in support.

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

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair Members of the Committee Nicole Wu Just to understand what's on going going on here, we have this state law that is trying to mandate what level of price maximum or minimum our schools can charge. And at the federal level there really isn't that rule.

So it's sort of the state tying its own hand there. There is some federal regulation about the maximum they can charge for reduced price meals which we follow. But I think this conversation is about the price that we're charging for the full meals. So you know, we could also just get rid of this regulation, this rule entirely.

Last year or the year before the Board of Education was entertaining some proposals to raise the price of the meals to match what's currently in state law.

And that would have made on affordability issues even harder for some of our parents, which is why this Bill has come up trying to deal with that so it's not required by the feds. This is completely in your control. Thank you. Please pass this Bill.

Thank you Hawaii Appleseed and support.

Chair Vice Chair Members of the Committee Daniela Spoto and Hawaii Appleseed. We stand in support.

Thank you Hawaii Hunger Action Network and support. Aloha Genevieve Hunger Action Network. We stand on our written testimony and support. Mahalo. Thank you Hawaii Food Industry association and support on Zoom.

Good morning again Chair Vice Chair Members of the Committee Alexis Chapman for HFIA. We stand on our testimony and support and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Apologies. We have the office of the Governor in support.

Hello. The Chair Vice Chair. Thank you.

That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us today. Additional testimony and support from one organization and four individuals. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on ZOOM Members?

Anything on this measure? If not Moving on to HB2 397 HD1 residing to school facilities.

We have the Department of the Attorney General with comments.

Morning Chair Vice Chair Members of the Committee, Randall Watt Deputy Attorney General Martin. Attorney General. As outline written testimony the Department has comments on this bill because the proposed contemplated project to be funded by these impact fees involves development and expansion of a pre kindergarten and Charter school capacity. There is chance that this may include

students that are outside the Kalihita Al Moana School Impact District. To address concerns that the still align with the U.S. constitution and U.S. Supreme Court case law involving connections between the fees and the use, the Department has recommended amendments that are detailed in our written testimony. I'm available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. School Facilities Authority and support.

School facility supports this bill.

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

Members questions? HB2398 HD1 relating to libraries.

Department of Education and opposition.

Aloha Chair Todd, Vice Chair Takenouchi and Members of the Committee. My name is Jesse Suki, Deputy Superintendent of Operations for the Hawaii Department of Education. The Department stands on its written testimony on House Bill 2398 draft 1. But I wanted to summarize some of our concerns.

I also note that the Department raised similar concerns yesterday when we testified on HB2294 House Draft 2. The Department Central concern arises where library facilities are physically integrated within active public school campuses. So that's about 12 libraries out of 50 or so libraries in the state. First, the existing law already establishes authority over library operations.

The library is already responsible under direction of the Board of Education for the operation and planning of libraries statewide. Second, exclusive control within an integrated school campus creates silos and divided operational authority. School campuses function as unified environments with shared infrastructure such as parking, bus loading areas, utilities and emergency access routes, just to name a few.

Dividing control over portions of an active campus complicates operations and facilities planning. Third, divided land control raises student safety concerns. Public schools serve minors and must maintain controlled campus access. Public libraries in the middle of campus, they serve the General public for the building fragment school parcels, creating parcels within parcels.

And we note here, as we noted yesterday, that Act 307 in 2022, the legislature's intent was to clean up that issue of fragmented parcels among several agencies. Both the public library system and the Department operate under the Board of Education and we should continue to work together collaboratively where facilities are integrated within active public school campuses.

Unified campus management is necessary to protect student safety and support our school operations. So for these reasons we ask that you defer this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii State Public Library System and support. Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us. Additional testimony with comments from the Hawaii State Board of Education and support from two individuals. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members questions?

Nope. Okay, Moving on to HB 1596 HD1 relating to student basic needs. support at University of Hawaii.

University of Hawaii in support on Zoom.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. Farah Marie Gomes, Associate Vice President for Student affairs with the University of Hawaii System. We have submitted written testimony in support of HB 1596 HD1 and we'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have. We appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony today. Mahalo.

Thank you. We have Hawaii Apple Seed and support not present. Okay, let's everyone indicating to be joining us. Additional two organizations in support. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Members questions? If not, the last item we'll take out before taking a 20 minute recess is going to be HB2233 HD1 relating to supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education program.

Department

of Health and support.

Good morning Mr. Tech and OG and Chair Todd and Members of the Committee. I'm representing the Department of Health.

The Department of Health supports HB 2233 HD1 and appreciates you hearing this. As you know, we work towards improving and assuring that people can have optimal health and that means creating the opportunities so that healthy nutrition and physical activity are the default options in their communities. Snaphead has provided that opportunity.

The funding comes through the USDA and there is a spectrum of support. So the University of Hawaii provides direct education and there's a public health component to that, working on policy systems and environmental change.

And so what our program has done is used it to do things like for example, funding food access coordinators across the counties, including additional access coordinators for Waianae and Molotai during Covid the food after the coordinators were instrumental in assuring that local food produce, local producers. Producers. My Japanese accent is coming through.

Local farmers were able to get their food to the people who needed it and to make things like the baskets and break it down instead of for tourism and restaurants, break it down for community suicide basket. So they have been instrumental in our communities.

And so it's a food systems change that we worked on quick build projects for Title 1 schools as in like Farrington High School, working with the engineering students there and working with the county to do quick build projects to show how do you make the crosswalks and the sidewalks around your school safe for students to walk and bike to school.

So we've done this across the counties. Unfortunately with the Federal fiscal year 2025, that is the last year of the SNAP ED funding so currently we are relying on that funding to carry through in what is our state's fiscal year 26.

And so what HB 2021 does, I mean 2020202033 does is it provides an appropriation for the State fiscal year 27 and would allow us to continue to provide support to SNAP eligible communities with these policies and systems change opportunities. So thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony and support.

Thank you, University of Hawaii with comments.

Al Chair Vice Chair Felicia Mobile Geyser for Dean Wall College of Tropical Agriculture. We stand on our written communes.

Thank you, Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

We stand on urent testimony in support.

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

We also stand on our written testimony in support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you Hawaii Apple Seed and support.

Aloha Chair Vice Chair Members, Daniela Spoto with Hawaii Appleseed. We are in support of this bill. Also, apologies for not being ready on the last Bill 1896.

I wanted to stand with my supportive testimony for this bill though I wanted to highlight I also have the distinction or privilege of in my prior position being the coordinator for this Stop AS program for the Department of Health. And so I was able to see the impact that that program had for very, very small investment.

It does a lot this program, as was already mentioned by the Department of Health funds the network of Food Access Coordinators which have been instrumental in all kinds of food access programs, as we said during COVID and getting food out to communities that were isolated also just an exposure, expanding programs that needed to be expanded.

So the reason that we have EBT access at farmers markets is because of the work that SNAP ED did. I was able, it was able to support some of the school garden education programs teaching kids how to access and how to use local fruits and vegetables.

This is in addition to the direct education that the university side does. So I just wanted to highlight that for such a small investment, this program does so much and the fact that it was cut by the Federal Government is really a tragedy. So I'd appreciate your support. Bill. Thank you.

Thank you Hawaii Hunger Action Network and support. Mahalo. Thank you Hawaii Food Industry Association and support on Zoom.

Good morning again, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm Alexis Chapman for HFIA. We stand on our written testimony and support and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. We have testimony and support from Doug Matsuoka that's present. That's everyone indicating they'd be joining us today. Additional testimony and support from the City and County of Honolulu Office of Climate Change, Sustainability and Resiliency, three organizations and five other individuals. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify?

Anybody on Zoom?

Members questions? Okay. If not, we're going to recess for 20 minutes. We'll reconvene at 12:05 for the rest of our agenda. Recess.

Aloha everyone. We are reconvening the House Committee on finance for today's 10:00am agenda. We are on to Bill HB 1976 HD1 relating to dementia. And first up, we are going to have probably should have done this earlier. Okay, we got 1976 HD1. First up we have Hawaii Law Enforcement Standards Board in opposition.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, Madam Vice Chair. My name is Victor McCraw. I'm the administrator for the Hawaii Law Enforcement Standards Board. We stand in firm opposition to this bill on the basis of its process, definitely not the merits of dementia training or dementia awareness.

The record thus far as this bill has progressed has no needs assessment whatsoever, just anecdotal testimony. There's no identified training deficiency of what's missing now. And we would assert that there is no missing training at this time. And there's no mechanism, most concerningly to verify that the required training will actually produce field performance improvement and better outcomes.

We'd like to see all of those things before we see this bill move forward. HRS139 6A2 already requires this type of training and it's already in the Board's proposed administrative rules to encourage this training. We have 64 hours of proposed training and crisis intervention, mental health response and de escalation training that squarely encompasses dementia recognition.

So the bill does not fill any existing actual gap in training. The bill would actually amend state law to implement just 60 minutes of training within a 64 hour proposed training block.

We feel that that's overreach and micromanagement at the level of a state statute or legislation when it can be handled through administrative rule or best handled through curriculum and board being approached about what that curriculum should entail and what the officer should be trained in.

The board was never approached regarding this legislation and to this date we have still not been engaged, but we would certainly invite that. As it says in our written testimony, we've got the expertise, we've got every state agency head as far as law enforcement in the state.

Together in one body we can put together a substantial needs assessment and like I said, most importantly a mechanism to measure the effectiveness of the training. If I can talk so that we can actually measure the performance in the field and what the outcomes are.

As it stands, this appears to be an awareness training which is not bad. But the board's in the business of measured outcomes and performance improvement and standards and competency for law enforcement. And like I said, our disappointment in this Bill is that it does not incorporate any of those things.

But it does micromanage the Board's authority and autonomy and its own statutory obligations to provide and designate this training.

Lastly, if the bill does move forward, we would respectfully request that any implication or change to hrs139 be removed so that the board can continue in its own process for law enforcement officers, at least to determine how this training should be incorporated in a comprehensive program so that we can build it into performance objectives, not just learning objectives.

And I stand for any questions.

Thank you Alzheimer's Association Hawaii and support.

Aloha Chair and Vice Chair. I'm Koby Chalk, the Alzheimer's Association in support of this bill.

We just want to clarify what some of the things that the Bill does and you know, the law enforcement standards work, you know, acknowledges that the Executive Office on Aging doesn't have the expertise in law enforcement, but the opposite is true too, that the board does not necessarily have the expertise in health, aging or neurocognitive topics.

And dementia is a medical and neurological disease. And the Bill asks for just one hour of dementia specific training, a very small fraction of a total training that they mentioned.

This Bill sets up more of a collaborative process such that Section 6e specifically allows any Department that already has or is developing dementia related training to submit its curriculum to EOA for review to ensure that the relevant components are present and accurate. This preserves agencies flexibility and strengthens existing programs within or with health expertise.

It doesn't replace them for departments already doing this work. It enhances accuracy and effectiveness for others that have not started. It establishes just a minimal practical standard for training among all first responders. And the national association recommends four hours initially two hours per year.

This Bill only has one using curriculum already used by some of these agencies that's being provided by the Alzheimer's association at no cost. And this has been a long standing priority without much progress or inconsistent progress made on it and implementation.

So this just sets that base level that we will continue to work with these departments to continue to improve it hopefully beyond one hour. But at the minimum, regardless of who comes in in leadership, there will be this one hour. And so far today we have more than 31,000 people living with Alzheimer's disease.

More often than not they to ER rooms for visits because of situations in the community. And for those who don't, about 60% wander at some point in their life. So there's going to be an encounter with first responders out in the community. So we're around for any additional questions, but we respectfully urge the passage of this Bill.

Thank you thank you.

We have Hayden and support.

Good afternoon, Chair, vice chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Hayden Cobb, and as someone who lost their dad to dementia and a mom from being a caregiver, I've been in situations firsthand where first responders are responsible for making sure that my loved ones are receiving proper help.

And that's why I believe it's critical for first responders to receive this training, because it affects the way they conduct themselves on a professional level, especially when it comes to working with those that have dementia.

And as you know, some of the statistics of this disease is becoming more prevalent in Hawaii, and you're going to start to see more and more scenarios of first responders having to deal with those that are impacted by dementia. Thank you for allowing me to testify in support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Peter Weston Black in support on Zoom. Sorry, you muted.

Yes, Thank you. My name is Peter Black and I have Alzheimer's. My home is in Anole on the Big Island where I live with my wife, caretaker Barbara. I strongly support these being 1976, which will bring annual dementia training for first respondents across the state to ensure the safety of those of us living with Alzheimer's.

I have no clear idea of what my future will be, but if I live long enough for my dementia to render me incompetent to be on my own, I really hope any encounter I might have with a first responder, be it a policeman or fireman, is an encounter with someone who's ready to deal with the acromion.

So thank you for the opportunity to testify in favor of this very positive step, giving first responders the necessary tools to deal with what can be a very fraud situation. Thank you very much.

Thank you. We also have a Barbara Block in support on Zoom.

Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Barbara Black and I'm Peter's caretaker. It breaks my heart to think of him wandering somewhere, confused and probably frightened and not knowing where he lived, who he was.

I remember a neighbor we found out walking and clearly unaware of who we were, but who took our hands with a smile as we walked her to her home. He did not know her.

And while most people are kind and caring when they see an uncertain and probably possibly lost person, and I'm always grateful to be living on this wonderful island, that may not always be the case. I think that HB 1976 would give first responders the tools they need and communication skills to deal with people with

dementia and learn some de escalation strategies, recognize signs of dementia which they may not recognize and safely assist someone who is lost or in distress. I respectfully urge you to support this Bill so that first responders do have the tools they need. I thank you for the opportunity to testify. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Members. That's everyone indicating they'd be joining us today. Additional testimony and support from the Executive Office on Aging, the Disability and Communication Access. This board, eight organizations and eight individuals. Anybody else in the room? Please, please just state your name for the record before you begin.

I speak in favor of this measure. Granted the calls for law enforcement and other first responders. I'm also a volunteer with the Medical Reserve Corps with the Department Department of Health. And during the pandemic, we were called to service along with first responders. And it's very important to.

To know who you're dealing with, understand that whether it's someone with mental health conditions, but also dementia. And this would only help our people of Hawaii statewide. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the room wishing to Testify? Anybody on Zoom

Members? Questions? No. Moving on to HB 1563 HD2. Relating to tobacco Products

Department of Health and Support.

Good afternoon, Vice Chair Takenouchi and Chair. To other Members of the Committee, I am Lola Irving representing the Department of Health and the Department of Health supports HB 1963 HD2 and thanks you for hearing it.

As you know, I talk a lot about our priority to support people having the optimal health and length of life and quality years of life. Tobacco continues to be the leading preventable cause of early death.

And what we do is one of the things we do is we value community engagement and working with communities and we collect data and provide it back to the communities so they are aware of what is happening in their community.

So if you look at page two of our testimony, you'll see that we've offered data by some of your district areas. So for example, while the state smoking rate is now at 9% for the Big island, it is 14.5%. For Puna and Katloo area, it's 21%.

When E cigarettes became popular, it was the rate of use was much higher amongst the neighbor island middle school and high school students. And so we provide this data. We also then provide training and information.

Unfortunately, through Act 206 that happened in 2018 session, the ability of the communities, the counties to take action through creating more restrictive tobacco regulation was taken away.

And so HB 1563 HD2 would repeal that addition to 328J and would provide them back with the ability to respond and be more nimble in responding to what is happening at their communities. So thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony.

Thank you. The Department of the Attorney General in support.

Good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Chelsea Okamoto. I'm a Deputy Attorney General and the Tobacco Enforcement Unit supervisor. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. And you have our written testimony and support. Our Department is in strong support of this bill.

We support restoring county's authority to adopt more stringent tobacco control measures to regulate tobacco products, especially since it has targeted our youth. And so we ask that the defective effective date be changed. The original effective date of July 1, 2026. We ask the Committee to pass this bill with our recommendation.

And thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. State Health Planning and Development Agency and support not present. American Heart Association and support.

Afternoon Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, My name is Lauren Simpson Gomez. I represent American Art Association. We stand in strong support of HB 1563 HD2. In our submitted written testimony we just wanted to emphasize that Hawaii continues to face serious challenges relating to tobacco use, youth vaping and nicotine addiction.

And again, tobacco use remains the leading cause of preventable death in Hawaii. And that we just respectfully urge the legislator to repeal state preemption and allow Hawaii's counties to adopt strong community driven tobacco control policies that reduce youth youth access, prevent addiction and protect the long term health and well being of all Hawaii families. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

Good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Kevin Ramirez. I'm the program manager of the Koala Shape Tobacco Free Hawaii which is a program of the Hawaii Public Health Institute. Thank you so much for hearing this bill and I'm glad to have the opportunity to testify.

The strong support of this measure relating to tobacco products. Historically effective tobacco prevention and control measures have started in the counties. So it's very important for that authority to be restored. And I'll just provide one example for smoke free air laws which we enjoy today. We go to a restaurant, we don't have to deal with secondhand smoke.

The first county in the state of Hawaii to pass that measure was Maui County in 2001. The state of Hawaii followed suit five years later in 2006. So that's just one example of why it's so important to restore county's authority to regulate tobacco products.

Because they are best situated to respond swiftly and effectively to regulate this product which remains the number one cause of effect Death in the state of Hawaii. So thank you again for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. We have Kamakua Kohala Health and support on Zoom. Not present Coalition for Tobacco Free Hawaii Youth Council and support on Zoom.

Aloha Chair Todd Vice Chair Takenouchi and Members of the Committee on Finance. My name is Maya Butts. I'm a student at Kalaheo High School and a Member of the Coalition for Tobacco Free Hawaii Youth Council. I'm testifying in strong support of HB 1563. We have worked hard over the years in the city and county of Honolulu.

The county of Hawaii and the county of Maui have passed bills to end flavored tobacco sales in their communities. This sends a clear message to the state to protect our keiki and restore their authority. Authority to regulate tobacco sales.

These county councils stood by the youth and community advocates in passing these bills and we ask that you do the same by passing HB 1563. With turbulence at the federal level, it is important to have as many tools available to fight against Big Tobacco.

Allowing counties to respond enables quicker action against emerging threats, fill gaps left by federal rollbacks and prevent harm before it becomes widespread. The Coalition for Tobacco Free Hawaii Youth Council urges the Committee to pass HB 1563 to restore county authority to regulate tobacco sales. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

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

Aloha Chair. Vice Chair. Members of the Committee, we stand on our written testimony in support of this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Hawaii State association of Counties in support. Court not present. Okay, I'll show. In opposition on Zoom. Not present. Hawaii Smokers Alliance in opposition.

Yes. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair and Finance Committee. My name is Michael Zayner and I'm here representing the Hawaii Smokers Alliance. For the last 20 years we have been a grassroots organization representing people who smoke and vape in Hawaii from bigotry and discrimination. That includes de jure and state sponsored discrimination against our minority group.

It's unfortunate that House Bill 1563 has come to where it has. It is a dangerous bill and it shows overall recklessness. Now, to put this in context, you have to understand who the proponents really are. So this Hawaii Public Health Institute and this Coalition for Tobacco Free Hawaii, they're a settlement agreement funded group.

So they get their money from government funds so they can run amok and wreck businesses and cause all kinds of problems. Yet they have no skin in the game. They don't face the financial implications for their actions.

Furthermore, they do not represent people who smoke or vape since none of them do and they are very much opposed to our enjoyment and to our well being. So that's something important to keep in mind.

Currently the taxes and funds that are collected per section 245 tax 3 Fund the Hawaii Cancer Research center, which is my understanding is already in financial trouble because tobacco revenues have decreased. Had to ask for more trauma system special Fund in jeopardy. That's health related.

Community health center special funds also gets millions of dollars from tobacco revenues as does emergency medical services special funds. So if they go around as a loose cannon with the city councils and pass things that can affect the funding for these groups.

So I think you guys did the right thing before a few years back to prevent that kind of thing because they, the city council itself isn't necessarily responsible for that. You guys have met with these people. You have commitments to their well being and to allow them to do that, it creates a.

It's a real problem when the tail starts wagging the dog. Can I have you turn to raffle, please? Yes.

That we're doing a two minute time limit. If you can just finish up the rest of your comments.

Yes. Thank you. So, yeah. I urge you guys not to let this thing out of Committee. I mean who wants to have another session because they did something stupid at the city council, you know, recklessly and you guys didn't have a say in it and now you got a lot of problems.

So I thank you very much for your time and consideration. I'd be happy to answer any questions before I go.

Thank you. We'll do questions at the end.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. We have the Easley Court in opposition on Zoom.

Hi, good afternoon. Chair Todd, Vice Chair and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Nikki and I'm speaking on behalf of the Easley Corporation. I'm here to explain how HB 1563 would hurt small businesses like ours and reduce tax revenue for our state.

We are locally owned and operate three convenience stores on Hawaii island over the past 45 years. We've served our community for many years. We provide good jobs that supports at least 29 local employees and their families and donate to community organizations to make sure customers can buy essentials every day.

We take the law seriously, especially when it comes to tobacco and nicotine sales. Flavored tobacco products are a large part of our business. Not only do they bring in sales, but they bring in customers into our stores.

If this bill passes, we expect a significant drop in revenue that would force difficult choices Cutting jobs, reducing employee hours or pulling back on community support. We've also seen what happens in places like California. Batting legal products doesn't change customer preferences. Instead, customers turn to other states and the illegal market.

These sellers don't check IDs, don't follow safety rules and don't pay taxes. At a time when Hawaii is facing real budget challenges, we can't afford to lose tens of millions in tax revenue. Tobacco regulation works best at the state's level. Allowing different county rules would cost more in enforcement, create confusion for retailers and strain public resources.

Bill 1563 would hurt small businesses, reduce state revenues and grow the illegal market. Please oppose House Bill 5063 thank you for your time.

Thank you. We have KRU in opposition on Zoom

Chair Todd and honorable Members of a Committee. My name is Chong Sullivan and I'm here today on behalf of a Korean American Grocery Association. I respectfully urge you to oppose House Bill 1563. This bill will create patch of work of tobacco laws across Hawaii.

Different rules in different county makes it very hard for small family run retailer to follow the law. Many Korean owned stores have a few employees and limited resources. The kind of complicity increase costs, creates confusion and put honest business at risk. Kegro represents first and second generation Korean Americans who work hard to build small business.

Like convenience stores, grocery store, gas station and liquor stores. These stores serve local community, provide jobs and generate important tax revenues. Our Members take AZ restricted sales very seriously. We strictly check IDs and follow the law. Because of these efforts, youth smoking is now a historic low, less than 2%. We're making strong progress without banning products.

Flavor ban have failed in other states. I have spoken with the Korean retailers in California and Massachusetts who have seen the result firsthand. Legal sales dropped, store revenue was lost and many businesses struggle to stay open. At the same time illegal markets grow.

Black market sellers do not check IDs, do not follow the law and do not pay taxes. This puts kids at greater risk, not less. It also brings more crime into community and takes money away from local business and state. House Bill 1563 will harm small retailers, reduce jobs and push sales into illegal market without solving the problem.

For those reasons, I respectfully ask you to pause House Bill 1563. Thank you for your time and leadership.

Thank you. We have non stop convenience and opposition on Zoom

Aloha Chairs and Members. My name is Jen. He and I speak on behalf of our family store, not in support of HPV 15 CPV. As a small local business, it's very hard for us with the increase in the cost and more productive bank create the financial trainings. We operate on small margins.

So if taking away adult legally product training us to even stay in small business. Nabil will not charge customers. Yeah demand but will push them to buy on online. Maybe shop out of the state. They will maybe online and to the black market.

You know, taking selling and test money away from the Hawaii local communities and our small business. We always check the iD. Yeah online they don't track iD. And we work hard to follow all the role. So please I ask you to please consider the impact on the small family run business and vote no on HB 1563.

Thank you.

Thank you. We have RNK Liquor in opposition on zoom.

Not present.

Not present. YLI Mini Mart. In opposition. Not present. Campbell Stop and Shop. In opposition on Zoom.

Yes.

Please proceed.

Hi, community. My name is T. As an independent retailer in Oda Nunu, I respectfully, of course, HB 1563. This measure would hurt local business like mine, reducing revenue, cutting employee hours and driving customers to the black market for online sellers that do not contribute to a local economy.

Adult consumer should have the freedom to choose legal products and the retailers who follow the rules should not be penalized. I urge lawmakers to consider the economic impact on small business and explore balance solutions that address public health concerns without hurting neighbors. Neighborhood with payloads. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We have the American Lung association in Hawaii in support On Zoom.

Not present. We have Aloha Discount Liquor. In opposition On Zoom. Not present. Alan Lee. In opposition. On Zoom.

Not present.

I and Members of the Committee. My name is Alan Lee. I own a convenience store in Kailua, Kona. I have a young family and a proud parent of two little ones. I run a small family business. My store helps support my family and my community. I'm here today to ask you to vote no on House Bill 1563.

Running a small store is already very challenging and continues to be increasingly difficult. Our cost keeps going up. Rent, power, insurance and supplies all cost more. Profits are smaller than ever. Many family stores are just getting by. We do our best to pay higher wages and treat our employees like Ohana.

Taking care of employees is a top priority for us as well as providing for our community. But wages are rising fast and it's getting harder to keep up. Retailers like me are the first line of defense. And when it comes to keeping tobacco away from kids, we take this job very seriously.

We check IDs, follow the law and train our employees to do the right thing every day. Flavored tobacco products are a big part of our sales. They help bring customers in our store. If this Bill passes and the local county passes their own laws, we could see up to a 70% drop in sales.

If that happens, it will challenge our ability to keep employees and maintain labor hours. Right now, we are fortunate to stay busy. But if this Bill passes, hard times are coming for many small stores like mine. Many store owners operate stores entirely by themselves and coming to a hearing to defend their business is challenging for them.

I hope that my testimony can serve for those who couldn't attend today. Clear statewide rules help small business follow the law. Different rules in different counties. Great confusion and higher costs that small stores cannot afford. Please think about small family owned businesses that are trying to do the right thing.

I respectfully ask you to oppose House Bill 1563. Thank you guys so much for your time. Alan Lee, thank you.

We have Don Weisman in support on Zoom.

Aloha Vice Chair, can you hear me okay?

Yes, please proceed.

Thank you. Yes. You know, you got my written testimony. I hope you'll take time to review that. But I just want to point out a couple of key, key things that will, I think, counter some of the arguments you've heard against this Bill.

First of all, the state loses or pays over $600 million a year in tobacco related health care costs. Another over billion dollars a year goes into lost productivity in our state. So it's an enormous drain on our state's revenue, the use of tobacco.

I worked for over 35 years as a tobacco advocate in our state, retired a couple years ago.

I stay involved because I've lost a number of close family Members and friends to tobacco use that they started when they were young, before they were the age of the correct age of purchase, and became really addicted to the product and really ugly deaths. So I've stayed really active in this.

I see it as a really important issue. The arguments that we, I helped to spearhead the smoke free air laws that you heard about earlier and they bottled up at the state Legislature year after year.

But at the county levels, we were able to get each county to do it separately and the state finally saw that the sky wasn't going to fall. And it actually helped businesses because at the time about 80% of the population were non smokers. Now we're at like 90% at least.

And what happened was they brought out the industry, brought out restaurateurs saying that it was going to kill their business if we couldn't allow people to smoke anymore in the restaurants. Well, turned out that business actually increased after those laws were passed because it unleashed the non smokers who didn't want to be exposed to toxic smoke.

And they went out and helped support those businesses. And also people who, who, who do continue to smoke, if they were, if they were encouraged to quit, they wouldn't just stop spending that money that they would spend on tobacco products, they'd spend it on other products that don't cost our state.

The, the millions and the hundreds of millions of dollars every year in tax revenue. They spend it on other products that might help their family.

Yeah, so I, I'm strongly in support of this and I think it's a, both a smart move from a health standpoint for our State, but also an economic smart move for the state, and that it will save the state probably billions of dollars in the long run by helping to reduce this leading cause of death and disability in our state. Mahalo.

Thank you. That's everyone who indicated they'd be joining us today. Additional testimony from Council Member Cowden from Kauai County Council and support Council Member Kagiwada from Hawaii County Council in support, as well as 13 organizations and 29 individuals. Additional four organizations and 13 individual. zero, sorry. That was. 13 organizations and 29 individuals in support.

Four organizations and 13 individuals in opposition. Anybody else in the room wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?

Yes, ma'. Am.