House Floor

Will the House come to order? Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

Mr. Alkos. Ms. Amato, Ms. Bellotti. Chung. Ms. Cochran. Mr. Evslin, Mr. Garcia, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Ghedion, Ms. Grandinetti, Ms. Hartsfield. Mr. Hashem. Mr. Hussey, Ms. Ichiyama, Mr. Ilagan. Ms. Iwamoto, Ms. Kahaloa, Ms. Capella. Ms. Kohokapu. Liloy. Mr. Keela. Ms. Kitagawa. Mr. Kong.

Not present.

Mr. Kush. Ms. Lachica, Mr. Lee, Ms. Loewen, Ms. Martin. Mr. Matayoshi, Ms. Matsumoto. Mr. Miyake, Ms. Morikawa. Mr. Moraoka, Mr. Olds. Ms. Puruso. Mr. Piric, Ms. Poapoe, Mr. Quinlan, Ms. Reyes. Oda. Mr. Sayama. Mr. Shimizu, Ms. Souza. Mr. Takeyama, Ms. Take no Uchi. Mr. Tam. Mr. Tarnas. Ms. Templo. Mr. Todd. Mr. Woodson. Mr. Yamashita. Madam Speaker. Here.

Madam Speaker, 49 Members are present. One is not present.

Item number two, reading of the journal. Representative Morikawa. Madam speaker made this matter be deferred. So ordered. Item number three, messages from the Governor. Mr. Clerk, are there any messages from the Governor? Madam speaker, there are none. Item number four. Senate Communications. Mr. Clerk, are there any Senate communications?

Yes. Madam speaker, if you and the Members will turn your attention to the addendum to today's order of the day. We are in receipt of a communication returning House Bill number 2240, House draft one, having passed third reading in the Senate. We are in further receipt of communications transmitting the noted Senate bills.

All having passed third reading in the Senate.

Representative Morikawa. Madam Speaker, I move that the Senate bills laying on the Clerk's desk pass first reading by title. Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

It has been moved and seconded that Senate bills laying on the Clerk's desk pass first reading by title. We will be taking a voice vote. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The motion is carried. Senate bills said. Senate bills pass first reading. Members, are there any introductions? Representative Loewen.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to recognize the care for INA now. Members in the gallery and anyone else here for Ocean Day, please stand. Today is Ocean Day at the Capitol Pilina Kanaloa. There are more than 70 organizations helping to host. They are set up in the Rotunda.

If staff or others want to stop in from 10 to 2. And welcome all to your House of Representatives,

Representative Tam.

Thank you. Madam speaker. It is my pleasure to introduce Mr. Michael Golou from the LGBTQ Commission. Please stand when I say your name. Isis Oozeborn from The Lambda Law Students Student association at the University of Hawaii, and Dale Vanderbrink from neighborhood board number 11. Welcome to your House of Representatives,

Representative Evelyn.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It's my honor today to welcome Mrs. Caitlin Kahue's fifth grade class from island school to the Hawaii State Capitol today. Students and parents, if you could please rise and if I could have permission to insert their names into the journal.

So ordered.

Welcome to your House of Representatives,

Representative Quinlan.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In the gallery today we have my favorite apiarist, Denise Antolini. Thank you for all the delicious honey and welcome to your House of Representatives,

Representative Iwamoto. Thank you, Madam Speaker. It's my honor to introduce amazing community outreach and service providers with the Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center. As I call your name, please rise. Andrew Ogata, Maddie Cespara, Dr. Rick Ramirez, Shalani Plasencia, and Kekoa Kealoha. Welcome to your House of Representatives.

Okay, if there are no further introductions, let's move on to the order of the day. Members, we are on port one Consent calendar.

Representative Morikawa. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules of the House in order to consider certain House bills for third reading by consent calendar.

Representative Garcia. Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any questions? All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The motion is carried.

Representative Kahaloa. Madam Speaker, I move to adopt the Standing Committee reports listed on pages 1 through 16, and that the House bills listed on pages 1 through 919 as may be amended past third reading. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion. Members, there will be no discussion as these are items agreed to by this body for placement on the consent calendar. Representative Laika for the vote.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. All Member. All majority Members vote I with the exception of the following on page 12, Stancom report number 113626 House HB 2293. HD 2. Rep. Amato votes no on page 14, Standcom Report 1164, House Bill 1688 HD 1. Rep. Iwamoto votes no. And on page 19, Stancom report number 1017, House Bill 2452.

Rep. Iwamoto votes no.

Representative Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, all minority Members vote aye.

Have all votes been cast? Said House bills past third reading. Members, please remember to submit to the Clerk the list of House bills on the consent calendar for which you will be inserting written comments in support or in opposition. This must be done by adjournment of today's floor session.

Members, we will have a short recess prior to convening the ordinary calendar recess, subject to the call of the chair.

Will the House come to order? Members? We are on page 19, part 2, ordinary calendar, item 5B, unfinished business. Representative Kahaloa.

Madam Speaker, I move to adopt the Standing Committee reports listed on pages 19 through 26 and that the accompanying House bills as may be amended, pass third reading. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion. Any discussions on these items beginning with HSCR number 1020261021 on the top of page 201023-1024-1025-1026. Representative Iwamoto. Reservations so ordered. Representative Cochran, Same request, so ordered. Representative Alcos. Reservations so ordered. Representative Garcia, Reservations so ordered. The top of page 21, standing Committee report 1029. Representative Iamoto.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support with one reservation. With reservations, with reservations so ordered. And may I add comments? Please proceed. Thank you very much. Madam Speaker. So this Bill authorizes the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to package and sell a portion of its agricultural loan portfolio to permitted third parties.

So I'm assuming that these loans are being made to farmers and that the third parties are private financial institutions who may pay pennies on the dollar to purchase these loans and then their job is to go collect on outstanding loans or when people are not paying.

I love farmers and I love the fact that this Bill ultimately wants to raise revenue so they can make more loans to farmers so that they can to help them, which is great. I'm concerned with those farmers who are struggling, struggling to repay their loans back.

And what my concern is that we are basically potentially increasing the fact that we're selling, we're selling off their loan to a collection agency at some point. And that concerns me. The stress of being sent to collection is overwhelming.

And we, and there are a lot of farmers who struggle year after year and because of some of the legislation we've provided, they are now eligible to get a grant. And so some of these farmers can actually later on, or hopefully if we invest more into giving them grants, they can actually then repay the loan.

But for this reason, I have this reservation. Thank you so much.

Signing Committee report 1031. Representative Moraoka.

Madam speaker, raising opposition. So ordered. Madam speaker, even though I agree with the intent of the Bill, the way this Bill is worded and certain things in this Bill is where my opposition comes. You know, expanding access to books is very important. Kids got to read.

As a grandfather, I have a four year old and a newborn baby and we read to them. The library system is free. It encourages, if you take these kids to the library, it encourages family time and building points and building stronger families.

But the equity issues here in this Bill about mailing them, my community suffers from a large number of homeless and shelters where some of these books may not get to by the mail that this Bill is saying, you know, and another big thing for me that stands out in this Bill is it doesn't clarify the operational costs.

I know it says 50% of the program has to be paid for by nonprofits. Well, where do nonprofits get their money from? Grants from taxpayers. Okay. You know, and then it doesn't describe. It doesn't show where the administrators, administrative responsibilities, the staffing, outreach, program management or any of those things go.

So for those reasons, I'm, I'm in opposition.

Thank you, Representative Garcia.

In opposition soared and I'd like to adopt the words of the representative from Waianae as my own.

Moving on to Speaker. Representative Cochran, I wanted to speak on the previous Item which was 1029-26. Okay.

Does anyone want to speak on 1031? Okay, let's move. Representative Tam thank you.

Madam speaker. In support.

So ordered. Please proceed.

Yeah, we're on 1031.

Yes. Thank you.

Madam Speaker. I am grateful for the legislative body to take this board Bill of today. This Bill will expand access of an already existing program that we have delivering books to those individuals, those kids that are from birth to five years old in many of our rural communities. And this expands access to the entire state.

Literacy rates in Hawaii has been dropping. We were once at 98% of our literacy rates. And allowing getting books to individuals in rural communities and across the state through the mail will greatly increase that and create an interest in learning in many of our young people instead of having them just simply being on their phones.

Madam speaker, regarding the nonprofits, this Bill will require or have a nonprofit give us 50% matching funds. And to the claim that this nonprofit is getting taxpayer dollars, the nonprofit in question is the Dahle Parton Imagination Library. I don't think that they're getting taxpayer at all. That's a wild assumption for someone to make.

So for these reasons, I asked this body to support this Bill. Thank you.

Moving on to standing Committee report 1029. Rep. Cochran.

Thank. Thank you, Speaker. I rise in opposition. I am completely supportive of. Proceed. Expand. Thank you. Expanding the revolving Fund to support our farmers. But I'm just not in the. I'm not fond of selling loans to third party. So that's my main reason. Thank you.

Moving on a Representative.

Thank you, speaker in support request insert written comments please.

So ordered. Thank you. Signing Committee Report 1037, Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Arise and support reservations and a brief comment.

Please proceed.

My reservations is to acknowledge and bring attention to some of the opposition testimony that brought some valid points that I think could be considered. May I also have permission to enter written comments into the journal?

So ordered.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Laa.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support, please proceed. Permission to insert written comments.

So ordered. Moving on to 1039. 1040. 1040. 1040. Representative Martin.

Thank you very much. I rise in support. This proceed is not very contentious, but we didn't pass it in the past, so we want to pass it this year. It's to allow the fineness netting that we use to protect our palm trees from coconut rhinoceros beetle to be used.

This netting is not allowed to be used for fishing purposes. And on this ocean day of the capital, I definitely support that. But this is a tool that we need in our toolkit. The state has funded a program to distribute netting, among other tools, to residents to save their palm trees until we have a biocontrol.

And this is one of those things, and we need to make it legal. Thank you very much.

Moving on to signing Committee report 1042. Representative Peruso.

With reservations and request to submit written comments.

So ordered. Moving on to signing Committee report 1043. 1044, Representative Garcia with reservations. So ordered. Representative Iwamoto. Reservations. So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Rising support with reservation and a comment.

Please proceed.

I understand the issue these critical service providers face where the volatility of the insurance market has made insurance coverage extremely difficult to obtain. My concern is with the testimony of the Attorney General which expressed that indemnification provisions are standard in government contracts and should be included.

Additionally, removing joint and several liability in order for these providers to receive affordable coverage could create a limiting landscape for justice. My reservations stem from ensuring that the legal recourse for both the state and the children in the system are adequately protected.

There is an absolute necessity to ensure clear accountability for each actor in a system responsible for the care of the vulnerable children. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Okay. Moving on to standing Committee report. 1045-1046-1047-10491050-1051-1052-1053.

Representative Iwamoto. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition. Please proceed. Thank you. This Bill is about unemployment benefits and it removes access and I quote, to individuals involved in a labor dispute and for whom an employer employee relationship continues to exist.

This may include workers who are locked out by an employer like the almost 600 Kapiolani nurses who worked for almost a year without a contract. And when they exercised their right to strike for one day, they were then locked out by their employer for 22 days. They were able to apply for unemployment insurance.

According to Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, this specific amendment to the unemployment insurance Bill is needed to conform to the federal agency's interpretation of a federal law. States were sent this memo from the federal agency in January and it is now March.

And we, it seems like we have now jumped at the opportunity to change our state statutes to conform to an agency interpretation.

We haven't even heard from the Attorney General yet whether or not the Attorney General will be pushing back, as the attorney has done, on many, many federal interpretations or the federal agency's interpretations that were misinterpreted according to the courts. Why are we so ready to turn our backs on workers in this particular way?

Reverse our own state policy and codified into our statutes? There are legislators that meet every other year. So. So not all states are codifying compliance with this state with this agency's interpretation, which may be overruled by a court. Or maybe the feds will have a different interpretation next month.

It is premature to codify the President's latest interpretation in our state statutes.

Thank you, Representative Hussey.

Thank you, Madam speaker. In opposition.

Please proceed.

Just wanted to note for the record the, the testimony from several labor organizations, unions relating to the. Their problems with this Bill.

Thank you very much, Representative Grandinetti.

Thank you, speaker, with reservations, please proceed. Thank you. I understand that this Bill is necessary to bring us into compliance and, you know, risks federal funding for our unemployment insurance system.

But I do want to flag that these guidelines tighten requirements on striking workers, making it harder for them to receive ui, making it so that they have to seek out alternative employment while they're on, while they're striking.

And I want to also flag that it applies specifically to workers who are part of unions that don't have hiring halls. So this will impact particularly workers in feminized industries like health care, like hospitality and our hotel industry. And it grows.

It runs counter to a growing movement across the country of states who are seeking to expand or even guarantee unemployment insurance for, for individuals in labor disputes. And I really believe that worker power is one of our strongest defenses against corporate abuse and rising authoritarianism.

And I really believe that we should be wary of anything, even something that seems relatively small like this, that weakens labor power at this time. So I hope as the Bill moves forward, we can look to see what other states are doing. Consult our Attorney General, see if we have other options.

And if we do pass this, continue to monitor federal guidance as it does change and revisit this statute and eventually move towards expanding access to UI for striking workers. Thank you.

Representative Garcia in opposition and permission to insert written comments.

So ordered. Representative Ray Zoda, with reservations. So ordered. Representative Souza, with reservations. So ordered. Representative Bilotti.

Thank you. With strong reservations. And may have the words of the representatives from Kaimuki and Kakaako entered as if they were my own.

Kaimuki and Kakaako. Yes. Thank you. So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Reservations. And may I have permission to enter written comments to the journal?

So ordered. Representative Peruso, with reservations.

And I would like to insert the comments of the representative from Kaimuki as if they were my own. And I would also like to insert additional comments.

So ordered. Representative Kapella.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. With reservations. And may I adopt the words of the representative from Kapahulu as if they were my own? So ordered.

Representative Cochran. Thank you. With reservations. So ordered. Let's move on to standing Committee report. 10541056. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. No vote. And may I have permission to enter written comments into the journal.

So ordered. Standing Committee report 10571058. Representative Iwamoto, reservations so ordered. 1059. Representative Iwamoto, reservations so ordered. Representative Garcia, reservations so ordered. 1060.

Representative Iwamoto. Thank you, Madam Secretary Rice in support. With reservations and brief comment. Please proceed. I. This Bill requires any affordable rental housing development project that receives financing or any financial assistance from the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation that they be allowed to allow one or more common household pet.

And I really support that part of it. I actually, my reservations are with the amendment that new tenants can come in with pets.

I would hope that this Bill as it moves forward, would be amended so that new tenants who are coming in with pets, specifically those who may be unhoused with pets, so that we can get them housed and not separate them from their. Their. From their pets, to allow the new tenants to come in with pets.

However, my concern is if people who are in publicly subsidized housing, if they are like, zero, we can now all have pets, they all go get pets, and then they start to earn too much money and become ineligible to receive public funded housing, and now they must seek housing in the private market, I'm concerned that we just don't have enough private housing rental housing.

Who will take pets and what we might find an inadvertent consequence is that we'll end up with a lot of people who are now unhoused with pets and make it even harder for them. So that's my concern is that. That's the concern. Thanks.

Representative Evelyn in support. Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Just to clarify, for LI Tech projects, as your incomes rise, you will not lose eligibility to live in the project even if your income rises beyond the initial eligibility requirements. Thank you,

Representative Cochran.

Sorry, Speaker, I've missed the boat here. If I can, when it get a chance to go back to 1056. 26, can you hold on?

Let's finish up. Anyone else would like to speak on 1060? Okay, let's move back to 1056.

Representative Cochran.

I wanted to record it with reservations on this one.

So ordered. Let's move on to 1066. On the top of page 26, 1067. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Matsumoto.

In strong support.

Please proceed.

HB 2558 expands access to health telehealth for out of state physicians in a practical way that mitigates Hawaii's struggles with healthcare access.

This measure supports individuals needing certain specialized care with the ability to seek services that are best for their treatment plans by allowing them to establish a patient provider relationship with an out of state provider via telehealth, which is critically needed in our state.

I've been encouraged by the support of this bill and the work that has been put into it by the Committee chairs to ensure proper safeguards are put in place. So, why is this Bill needed?

Many of you in this room have heard my family's story and experience with this issue, but I'd like to share it with you now to illustrate why this bill is needed. Five years ago, my mother was diagnosed with metastatic melanoma, and she was referred by her oncologist to see a specialist at Fred Hutch in Washington.

That specialist was not able to have a telehealth meeting because he did not have a Hawaii license. Therefore, she had to pay to go up to Washington to have a 45 minute conversation.

Then three years ago, my father was diagnosed with a rare kidney cancer. Due to a lack of oncologists in the state, it took him six months to get his first appointment and has had multiple oncologists. After his initial surgery, he was referred to go to a specialist in Boston. Same story as my mom.

A telehealth appointment wasn't available to him. Both of these appointments were extremely helpful and critical to their continued care, but it cost our family thousands of dollars out of pocket. Unfortunately, my parents' stories are not unique. There are countless examples of those in our community that are facing similar situations.

And we all know traveling for medical care from Hawaii is not only time consuming, but also costly. Flights, accommodations, and lost workdays add up, creating a financial strain that many in our state cannot bear.

By enabling telehealth consultations, we alleviate this burden, allowing families to save precious resources and focus on what truly matters, their health and well being. There are currently 27 states that allow for some type of out of state telehealth care in their state law. That's more than half of the country.

This bill is needed here in Hawaii more than anywhere else. We are geographically isolated in middle of the Pacific, unable to just drive across state lines. And additionally, we are an island state with critical health care needs in our rural communities. This Bill is not merely a policy change.

It's a beacon of hope for countless families across Hawaii who face the daunting challenge of accessing essential medical care. And if I could have additional comments to outline what the bill does and the safeguards that are put into place.

So ordered.

Thank you.

Moving on to Standing Committee Report 1068. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support with reservations and a brief comment.

Please proceed.

So, I love this Bill. I strongly support it. My only issue is with one line which strikes, which prohibits—well, this Bill basically says insurance companies should pay for retrieval for fertility preservation. However, once it's retrieved, it doesn't—it explicitly excludes the coverage for storage.

So, I think there's a lot of people who are undergoing these serious health services who could actually benefit if it also covered storage. Thank you,

Representative Pierick.

Thank you. With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Garcia.

Same request.

So ordered. Let's move on to Standing Committee report 1069. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. No vote and permission to enter written comments.

So ordered. Representative Matsumoto with reservations. So ordered. Representative Gideon.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Rey Zoda with reservations. So ordered.

All right, Representative La Chica for the vote.

Madam speaker, on the measures before us, all majority Members vote I with the exception of the following on page 21 Standcom Report 1029 House Bill 2216 HD2 Rep Cochran votes no. Standcom Report 1037 HB 2454 HD2 I'm sorry, scratch that next page. On page 22 Standcom Report 1042 HB Number 1840 HD2 Rep. Iwamoto votes no.

On page 23 Standcom Report 1047 HB2324 HD2 Rep. Amato votes no. On page 24, Sancom Report Number 1053 HB2165 HD2 Rep. Amato, Hasi, Iwamoto and Poipoi vote no. On page 25 Standcom Report Number 1056 HB2386 HD2 Reps. Iwamoto, Capella, Lowen and Tam vote No.

Sancom Report 1057 HB2423HD3 Rep. Kong votes no and on page 26 Standcom Report 1069 HB 1898 HD2 Repquila votes no.

Representative Garcia thank you Madam Speaker.

On the measures before us, all minority Members vote I with the exception of the following on page 19 S.C.R. 1020 House Bill 1764 House Draft 1 Herrick votes no page 20 S.C.R. 1024 House Bill 2604 House Draft 2 Representative Peric votes no and Garcia votes no. S.C.R.

1025 House Bill 2118 alone House Draft 2 Herrick votes no page 21 S.C.R. 1031 House Bill 1934 House Draft 1 Representatives Garcia and Moraoka vote no. Age 24 S.C.R. 1050 House Bill 1514 House Draft 2 Garcia votes no S.C.R.

1052 House Bill 2164 House Draft 1 Peric votes no S.C.R 1053 House Bill 2165 House Draft 2 Representatives Aukos, Garcia, Gideon, Matsumoto, Moraoka and Pyrrick Vote no S.C.R. 1054 House Bill 2283 House Draft 1 Herrick votes no Age 25 S.C.R. 1056 House Bill 2386 House Draft 2 Representatives Aukos, Garcia, Gideon, Matsumoto, Shimizu and Pyrrick Vote no S.C.R.

1057 House Bill 2423 House Draft 3 Representatives Garcia Perrick Vote no S.C.C.R. 1059 House Bill 1984 House Draft 2 Peric Votes no S.C.R.1060 House Bill 1593 House Draft 1 Peric Votes no Page 26 S.C.R. 1069 House Bill 1898 House Draft 2. Representatives Aukos, Garcia, Gideon, Matsumoto, Moraoka, Shimizu and Peric vote no.

Have all votes been cast?

Representative Peruso thank you Madam speaker on Standcom Committee report 1037 House Bill 2454, I'd like to register my reservations.

So ordered.

Representative Poipoy on page 25. Stancom Report 1056 HB 2386 with reservations so ordered.

Representative Same request, Madam speaker.

Stand com report 105626 House Bill 2386 with reservation so ordered.

Representative Souza thank you Madam Speaker.

Same request Stan report 1056 with reservations so ordered.

Madam Speaker. Representative Ilagan in request so ordered. Okay, said House bills past third reading.

Representative Kahaloa Madam Speaker, I move to adopt the Standing Committee reports listed on pages 27 through 34 and that the accompanying House bills as may be amended pass third reading.

Representative Morikawa Alice Speaker, I second the motion. Any discussion on these items beginning with HSCR number 1071107. Representative Muraoka Madam speaker in opposition, so ordered.

Madam Speaker, when it comes to this bill, supporting youth and traumatized youth is something that I completely stand for. However, in this bill, it's explicitly what's the ages of 18 to 24. Now that doesn't erase the trauma that they've gone through in their life.

But creating a whole new government branch to help fix this, even though it's a five year pilot right now, there's already government assistance in place that can help these. There's also other career options. And in this fertile job market, a lot of companies are offering sign on bonuses. You'll have the opportunity to join the military.

You have so many opportunities out there that can help. When you turn 18, this is a chance to reset your life to try and get away from the trauma. Madam Speaker, I'm not allergic to it. I suffered trauma growing up. I was born and raised in Waianae. I suffered, I struggled.

We've had a lot of things that they pointed in that's in this bill. And I just feel like creating a new branch to do it when there's already services like this that exists on top of the fact that they have opportunities to now change their life for the better and get away from the trauma. Giving themselves self worth by fixing and using what they've been through as fuel for it. For those reasons, I'm in opposition.

Representative Marten.

In strong support. And I'd like to appreciate the Vice Chair of Human Services and Homelessness for working on this bill. We supporting our youth to get a great start in life is the best investment that we can make. And as parents, we don't stop helping them when they turn 18. For those that are homeless and do not have that support from their extended family, from their neighbors, this is a way for the state to give them a hand up and help get them started. Thank you.

Representative Garcia.

In opposition. And I'd like to adopt the words of the good Representative of Waianae as my own.

So ordered. Moving on to standing committee report 1075. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you Madam speaker in opposition with a brief comment.

Please proceed.

I, I agree that it's a good idea to increase voter registration and participation, but voting is a privilege and only if you are someone that is interested in being part of the process.

So I feel that the opt in should be actually opt out so that you make a conscious decision, Conscious decision to be registered to vote because that's what you desire to do as being part of the process.

Another point is before we start adding masses into our voter rolls, we need to clean up our voter rose to get it to a a good basis. That is the basis of my opposition. Thank you Madam Speaker.

Representative Hussy in support. Please proceed.

Just want to mention that voting is a right.

Thank you Representative Garcia in opposition.

Please proceed. Madam Speaker. We already have automatic voter registration here in Hawaii. In fact, when someone applies for a driver's license or state id, there is attached to it a voter application. And you can choose to opt in and automatically you'll be enrolled to vote. It's a pretty simple process, but it gives the individual a choice.

I conscientiously choose to opt in to vote. This Bill removes that. And most people are not paying attention to all the intricate details of what's on an application. They're just trying to get their ID or just trying to get their driver's license. And this will automatically register people to vote.

We, we have what, about 800,000 registered voters here in Hawaii. We have still the lowest voter turnout nationwide. So just because people are registered, they're not voting. We have low turnout. And this Bill would significantly increase the amount of registrants on the voter rolls. And what does that mean?

We're going to be mailing out a bunch of more ballots out there to people who really has no plan on voting. That's a problem. With all those mail in ballots just being mailed out to people who have no desire to vote, that's a problem. Again, we already have automatic Voter registration.

We should keep it an opt in process. This Bill sets bad precedent. No vote.

Representative Gideon rise in opposition and like to adopt the representative of Kapolei's words, my own.

So ordered.

Representative Kila, reservations, Madam Speaker.

So ordered. Representative Rezona with the reservations. So ordered. Representative Capella.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support. Please proceed. The decisions that we make on this floor impact every single person. And I think it's really important that we try to ensure and and remove barriers to allow every single person that right to vote.

And when it comes to making a choice, you make a choice the second you put your pen to the paper to vote for an individual that you believe supports your values. This is about making voting or supporting voting as a right.

Thank you, Representative Garcia. For the second time in opposition.

Yes, voting is a right. If you are a US citizen and this is great. We should encourage voting. We want to get more people voting here in Hawaii. I fully support that. But opting in isn't a barrier. Checking a box to opt in isn't a barrier. It's really not that difficult.

And so to say that what we have now is a barrier to voting is just ridiculous. It should remain an opt in process.

Representative Tarnas, thank you.

In support, please proceed. Your Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian affairs has worked on a number of bills to try to increase the number of people who choose to vote.

And we have other measures on the order of the day today, but this one in particular is just trying to increase the number of people who are registered to vote so that they would have the opportunity to vote. Our job is then to motivate them to vote, but they have to be registered first.

So this is a way to get them to first base, get them to register to vote. And then we have a job to do is to get them motivated to come and show up, right, you know, fill out their mail in ballot or show up to vote in person. We're working on that too.

So I encourage Members to support this measure.

Thank you, Representative Muraoka.

In opposition. And can I have the words from the representative from Hopeilli inserted as my own? And I'd also like, and I also would like to encourage all of my colleagues to take heed of and insert the words of our chair of judicial as my own as well.

And using his words, I'd like everybody to encourage them to vote for walk in voting centers so we can choose to vote if we want to and we can register that day as an option. Thank you, Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support And I'd like the words of the Judiciary Chair inserted into the record as my own.

So ordered. Thank you. Moving on to sending Committee report 1078. Representative Iwamoto, reservations. So ordered. 107.

1080.

1087. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition with comment.

Please proceed.

This Bill is about making appropriations and approves payments or settlements for claims against the state, its officers, and its employees. I'm, I'm opposed to one settlement. One settlement is identified as being 8 million—$8 million settlement.

And from the Bill, it looks like it's for DOE allegedly violating due process of one—of one student. It's not a class action, it's one student. I was told that we can't single out one settlement and strike it from the bill as it moves forward.

However, that it was all take, there was all or nothing kind of Bill. However, that kind of didn't make sense to me because I noticed that as the Bill moved through the house, there was an amendment to add another settlement to the Bill.

And so, if we can add a settlement, we certainly can amend the Bill to remove one settlement. All settlement agreements with the state must have a clause that says upon approval by the Legislature and Governor. The fact that the Legislature has to vote on approving the settlement means we're part of the checks and balances. So, there—so, that we should not be, we should not be guilty of dereliction of duty.

We are not here to rubber stamp all these settlements, especially one so large that it will encourage more claims at a higher dollar amount.

If we remove this 8 million dollar settlement from this Bill, it will send an important message that we are acting as responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars. Thank you.

Moving on to standing committee—oh, Representative Quinlan. Moving on to 1091. 1094. 1095. Representative Cochran.

I'm sorry, Chair, Speaker. 1091.

Okay, let's. We're at 1095 and we can go back to that later. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations, and if we can go back to 1094 too, thanks.

So ordered. Let's move back to Representative Perruso.

I'm still on 1095.

Yes, we are.

Okay, so with reservations. And I'd like to insert written comments, please.

So ordered. Moving on to 1091. Oh, Representative Hartsfield.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In regards to 1095, also with reservations.

So ordered. Representative Lee Loy

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Same requests on Stancom 1095.

With reservations.

So ordered.

Representative Cochran.

Yeah, I'll put in a reservations for 1095, but also back to the 1091.

Can we hold off on that until we complete 1095? Okay, let's go back now to 1091. Representative Cochran?

Yeah, I wanted to insert a reservations.

So ordered. And let's move to 1094. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations

so ordered. Representative Poepoe.

1094. Reservations.

so ordered. Representative Cochran,

Same request for 1094.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Same request. 1094. Thank you, Speaker.

So ordered. Representative Belatti.

Same request. Reservations.

So ordered. Okay, let's move on to the top of page 29. Standing committee report 1096. Representative Kitagawa.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. With reservations and a brief comment. Thank you. Thank you to the Chair, first, for working on this bill and for all his hard work on it and looking at ways to generate funds. Funds to support very important purposes like DHHL, affordable housing, and the land conservation. My concern with this bill is that the conveyance tax will increase starting at homes that are at $2 million.

And although I know that the majority of homes in Hawaii are currently under this amount, there are still homes that may be, for example, generational homes or older homes in our communities that may not be in the best shape, but that may be close to or over $2 million currently because of the increase in our housing costs.

And I am worried that this, the threshold of $2 million will potentially impact homes that are owned by local families, working families, or those that are trying to transfer their homes generationally from grandparents to grandchildren, parents to children. And I really want to be able to not, to decrease the amount of the negative impact that we are going to see on our local families.

So as we continue to talk about this bill and it moves to the Legislature, I'm hoping that there may be possibility to look at increasing that amount so that we can really look at taxing those who may be coming from out of state, buying those multimillion dollar homes, who can afford a higher tax compared to negatively impacting our local families. Thank you.

Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Support with reservations. And can I adopt the previous speaker's comments as my own? May I make brief comment also?

Please proceed.

You know, as minority conservative caucus, I am against higher taxes. But I do believe we need to fund the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. No question. Of course there are different ways of doing that. I think this is creative way of doing it.

I want to acknowledge the Housing Chair for being bold in this. You know, my understanding the way that it is set up, it is paying less taxes for someone who is below the 2 million dollar threshold. And as the previous speaker did explain, I think that threshold might be increased a bit.

But I'd like to see some of the higher income, maybe even outside investment purchases, be captured in the higher percentages for higher value purchases. So I'd like to move the conversation forward and see how the Department of Hawaiian Homelands can benefit from this. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Amato.

Thank you, speaker, with reservations. And I would like to adopt the words of the representative from District 48, please.

So ordered. Representative Garcia

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to thank the representative from Kahulu for her remarks. I think it's spot on, but here we go again. Another tax increase.

And yes, it may adjust the taxes just by a very small amount for those who are below $2 million, but it increases the conveyance tax for those properties above $2 million. And like was mentioned, $2 million doesn't mean you're taxing the rich. There are families with generational homes which will be affected by this.

Local families will be affected by this. We're adding more tax increases now. The premise is, well, this is going to go to benefit Hawaiian homelands. We should not be increasing taxes to do something that we should already be doing from the General Fund.

It is our duty, it is our constitutional obligation to fund and operate the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Federal Law. This bill says, because we're not going to do our job, because we're not going to appropriate funds the way we should be doing it from our General Fund, we're going to increase taxes on people to pay Hawaiian homelands.

This is not the path forward. This is another burden on Hawaii's local families. No vote.

Representative Perruso.

Strong support.

Please proceed.

And I'd like to just publicly thank the author of this measure and would like to insert written comments.

So ordered. Representative Takenouchi

With reservations.

Please. So ordered. Representative Alkos.

In opposition.

So please proceed.

I'd like to adopt the words of Copley. Representative from Copley. Thank you.

So ordered. Representative Gedeon.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Muraoka,

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Cochran.

Thank you, Speaker. With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Lee.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Evslin.

In support.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. There's a lot going on in this bill and I'm not going to try and explain all of it because we would be here all day. But I do want to just describe a few elements of it.

At its heart, it's shifting our current conveyance tax structure to a marginal structure, which is just a more fair structure. It's getting rid of the massive cliffs at each of these brackets, which lead to big spikes in taxes. It also introduces a cost of living adjustment so the brackets will change over time.

It gets rid of the existing penalty in our conveyance tax structure for multifamily housing. And really importantly, it reduces the conveyance tax or no change in conveyance tax for 75% of home sales in Hawaii. Conveyance taxes really over the $2.2 million range would go up significant increases on the higher value properties. This would raise $170 million.

$60 million would go towards DHHL for their first ever dedicated annual funding source. This is critical to ensure that they can provide homes for every single Native Hawaiian beneficiary on their wait list. $40 million would go towards infrastructure in TOD districts. $40 million would go towards the Rental Housing Revolving Fund to help finance affordable housing.

$10 million would go to our Legacy Land Conservation Fund. You know, and for me, at the end of the day, I support it really for three reasons.

One, is that I think it is important when we have the highest housing costs in the nation to try and reduce taxes on the median cost of housing and below, which is what this bill does. Number two, is when we have lots of out of state money flowing into Hawaii and propping up luxury home sales.

I think it's important that we should honestly be increasing taxes on these and ensure that if you are purchasing a home in Hawaii, especially if you are out of state coming in, that you should be supporting DHHL, you should be supporting rental housing in Hawaii, you should be supporting infrastructure, you should be supporting land conservation.

And lastly, and most importantly, I really strongly believe that a percentage of every home sale should go to support the Department of Hawaiian, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. We are here on Native Hawaiian land. Every transaction I think should support Native Hawaiian beneficiaries, which this bill does. Thank you,

Representative Grandinetti.

Strong support. And I would like to adopt the words of the Housing Chair as my own.

So ordered.

Thank you.

Representative Kapela.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Hash. Representative Cochran.

Thank you. I just wanted to add, if I can enter comments into the Journal for this item.

Are you in support or

Okay, thanks.

I, I with reservations.

So ordered.

Representative Belatti.

Thank you. In support, may I have the awards of the Chair of Housing also interest into the Journal as if they were my own?

So ordered. Representative Souza

In support, and I would like to insert the words of the Housing Chair into the Journal as my own.

So ordered. Representative Iwamoto.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Kila.

Thank you, Madam speaker. In support.

Please proceed.

May I please adopt the words of the Housing Chair as my own and provide a comment?

So ordered.

Madam Speaker, I want to talk to the fact that this is, if not one of our first attempts to provide a dedicated funding source to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. It was this Legislature where you previously served as a Housing Chair that did the historic appropriation of $600 million to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands.

That has gotten us in a great place to get many folks off the list and into homes. But that cannot be the last tranche. Madam speaker, with this, it proposes that for every home sale that something be deposited into a special fund to create housing for Hawaiian homestead beneficiaries.

I want to acknowledge that there's a whole generation of folks that live today in Hawaii that have also died in Hawaii, that have lost hope in the palm of Hawaiian homelands. And I can understand why, because for their whole life, they were sold a promise of a home, a homestead, the opportunity to farm, the opportunity to live.

And for decades, that went unfunded and not promised. But I acknowledge that in that same criticism, legislatures before us did not see value in that. But the narrative has changed and so has the tide. Madam Speaker, I'm a proponent that when we house our native Hawaiian beneficiaries, we are housing Hawaii.

They are our workforce, they are our first responders, they are our neighbors. Those are the folks that are doing the best to live here in Hawaii every single day. I have, if not one of the oldest homesteads in the state, one of the largest homesteads in the state.

In the 1930s, who would have thought that they would be here today? But when we think about where the homesteads exist, it's true. The land sucked. There was no infrastructure, Nobody wanted it. It was derelict.

So we are forced now today to try to make progress and move forward on building homes on land that was not sought after. But in that whole shift of us trying to house our needy Hawaiian beneficiaries, this is our first attempt to really house Hawaii. I believe it is a trickle up.

When we can remove somebody and put them into a generational home, that home is staying in their family. This is our only constitutional way to guarantee a home that we build will go to not just a Hawaii family, a native Hawaiian family. I think about Auntie Helen Bisson of Maui, this last interim.

She is 90, she just moved home and she got awarded her homestead in Pu'. Uhona. She told us that she just selected her burial plot because she knows she can now die in Hawaii. And I think about the people that have died on this list waiting for movement.

But I also want to challenge us, Madam speaker, that this special fund doesn't stop us from also appropriating more money to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. We can do so through the General Fund. We can do so through different mechanisms. But I think about every native Hawaiian beneficiary that is waiting for us to deliver on this promise.

And I thank my colleagues of both aisles for the debate today about this proposed measure. Because, Madam speaker, it is a measure like this that will live on past all of our times in office should it be adopted. And so when I think about housing native Hawaiians, I think about housing or Hawaiian beneficiaries.

This is our attempt, $60 million at the cap. It is not going to absolve 27,000 people off the list, but it can get somebody who's been waiting for the 1960s into a home into. It can help somebody who just got onto the list and get into a home in the next couple of years.

There is a pipeline of homes that are being proposed for the Department of Hawaii Homelands to build, and this dedicated source allows them a dedicated funding because this is one agency that throughout the political will of the Legislature has to survive. It has to move forward. And this is our attempt to do so.

So in the same sense, I acknowledge the beneficiaries that have been disappointed on the progress. I want to tell them that we are doing our absolute best today. I think about the concept in the interim I shared at my town hall. A lo'i without water cannot thrive. Now the lo'i has water and it's hydrophobic.

I learned that after the Maui fires that when there's a fire, the soil becomes hydrophobic. It cannot take to the water. So now they are moving at a pace where they're trying to keep up. So I acknowledge that in the same good of moving this Department forward, they've also had to face new challenges.

But what a time to be alive that in this Legislature we are looking to support the Department of Hawaii Homelands. So for all of that, with the Housing Chair, your lead, and the leadership in this chamber, I look forward to hopefully seeing a measure like this pass this session. So mahalo, Madam Speaker,

Representative Hussey.

In support with the request to insert written comments.

So ordered. Representative Alkos.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Madam Speaker, I think we should tax outside investors more, you know, foreign investors more instead of the local families, because this really going to hurt the local families, local business owners here in Hawaii. And I really do see the good help in trying to help the Hawaiians in getting more housing, more land.

But you know, we're bringing a lot of money from tourism. We bring a lot of money from our taxpayers. And I think that if we use our money wisely and stop creating over government, more departments, and use the money to really help the Hawaiian people out here, the local families here.

But this is really going to hurt our local business owners, our local families. And that's the reason why I'm opposed on this bill. Thank you.

Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Still in support with reservations. I wanted to mahalo the representative from Nanakuli for his words.

You know, I had this comment to add, and I got it from my colleague from Waianae yesterday. That if this takes off, why don't we remove the $60 million cap and, and give Department of Hawaiian Homelands everything that's brought in. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Okay, let's move. Representative Yamashita.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I rise with reservations.

Please proceed.

Thank you very much. While I appreciate the well intention of this bill, I believe it is the wrong mechanism to help the Department. You know, it is. At some point in time, we really gotta start making the hard decisions.

And I believe that what this bill is trying to do is, because we don't have property tax authority, is trying to tax properties. And so, you know, it is a one time transaction on that property. So from that perspective, it is not a recurring expense on who we should be taxing.

As far as I think what the argument of some people are trying to make. Number two is I think that, you know, we have tried over the years, You know, okay, I'll talk about this. We've, at statehood, what we tried to do was take care of our fundamental responsibility, which is government operations.

Our main subsidy was for the poor, the indigent, and those kind of things. I think over the years we've expanded into economic purposes, environmental purposes, and now we all have all these huge credits and exemptions for all these different purposes. And we have grown beyond what we can sustain.

Now, I do believe that the Department of Hawaiian Homelands is one of our responsibilities and we should be funding it and we should be actually having them funded in the base budget and that should be the goal. I don't think special funds are the right mechanism to do it.

You know, if you go back several decades, you know, there was a time when we only had maybe three special funds total. But over the years we've created credits and exemptions and all these different things. And then we've, you know, to make up the difference, we've had to create all these different special funds.

Instead of doing what the Legislature should be doing, which is making the tough decisions on where we should be putting our General Funds. We'll see if this Bill makes it all the way to the end. And I have Further comments about this and I'll save it for if it does return to us. Thank you.

Representative Chun.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Ilagan.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. At the appropriate time, could we go back to Standcom 1094? Thank you.

Okay, let's go back then to 1094. Representative Ilagan.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I stand in support of this measure. I would like to share with this body that this measure adds a commercial project into a current program for experimental and demonstration residential projects.

And the reason why, Madam Speaker, is because communities like mine has a lack of commercial areas for job opportunities for local families. And what this does is start up the discussion of commercial development. And I want to share this important part because there are some reservations to this measure, and I think the biggest reservation is transparency.

The process for a commercial project to go through the community is that the mayor must propose the plans for this commercial project to the county council. And in that county council, they will have three readings on top of their committees. And that will really vet out the importance of that project, whether or not it's warranted in that community.

So I just want to share with this body, Madam Speaker, that it's not a way to just put commercial projects in wherever in this state. But it just allows commercial projects to be, one, championed by the mayor, and then go through our county council.

And that is a strong home rule to understand what community jobs that's needed in that area. And that's the reason why the community commercial projects is in this measure. And I just would like to share that because of the reservations that was voiced in this body. Thank you.

Moving on to Standing Committee Report 1097. 1098. 1099. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Reyes Oda.

Reservations.

So ordered. Standing Committee Report 1100. Representative Cochran.

With reservations.

So ordered. 1102. Representative Shimizu.

Apologize, Madam speaker. Could you go back to SCR 1100 when time permits?

Okay, let's go back to 1100. Go ahead.

No vote with permission to enter written comments.

So ordered. 1102. Representative Garrett.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Rising in support.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise today in support of House Bill 1873, HD 2, which makes several targeted improvements to the governance framework of the University of Hawaii Board of Regents. Madam Speaker, as we know, the University of Hawaii plays an essential role in our state.

It educates tens of thousands of students, supports research and innovation, helps train our workforce, and serves communities across every island. For an institution of this scale and importance, strong and effective governance at the board level is critical.

The Board of Regents helps guide the long term direction of the University, oversee its finances, and ensure that it fulfills its mission to serve the people of Hawaii. This bill focuses on strengthening that governance. First, the measure requires members of the board to participate in periodic governance training.

That training will cover fiduciary duties, accreditation and academic quality, budgeting and finance, open meeting requirements, public records law, and system wide planning and governance. These are core responsibilities for anyone serving on the governing board of a major public university system. Ensuring that Regents receive ongoing training in these areas help promote sound decision making and effective oversight.

Second, the bill strengthens the Candidate Advisory Council process that helps recruit and evaluate individuals for service on the board. The measure clarifies that candidates should have experience relevant to higher education governance, public fiscal oversight, large scale organizational leadership, Native Hawaiian education and culture, or other areas relevant to the University's mission.

Madam Speaker, the goal here is straightforward. We want to ensure that we have a strong pool of highly qualified individuals to consider when filling these important positions. Third, the bill allows for a strategic planning retreat for the board that would be exempt from open meeting requirements provided that strict conditions are met.

Importantly, the Judiciary Committee heeded the recommendation of the Office of Information Practices to further narrow this provision. The bill now limits the exemption to one retreat per year, requires public notice of the retreat and attendance, requires that materials be made publicly available, and prohibits any decision making during the retreat.

Strategic planning retreats are common governance tools used by boards across the public, private, and nonprofit sectors. They allow board members to step back from the minutiae of monthly agendas and focus on long term planning for the institution.

I want to thank the Judiciary Chair for his thoughtful work in refining this position and ensuring that appropriate transparency safeguards remain in place. Madam Speaker, the second issue raised during committee discussions relates to financial disclosures.

The Ethics Commission has expressed concern that removing public access to the Regents' financial disclosures could make it harder to identify potential conflicts of interest. I want to acknowledge the important role the commission plays in maintaining public trust in government, but it is important to clarify how this bill actually works.

Under this measure, Regents would still be required to file financial disclosure statements with the Ethics Commission just as many other appointed officials do today. Those disclosures would continue to be reviewed by the commission as part of its statutory oversight responsibilities.

After reviewing those filings, the commission would still be able to notify a Regent that, based on the interest reported, they should recuse themselves for matters involving certain organizations or transactions. In other words, the preventive function of financial disclosure remains intact.

Madam Speaker, in response to an email that we all received from the Executive Director of the Ethics Commission, I also want to make it clear that no one expects them to review every single agenda item before the University or monitor every board meeting in real time. That is not how ethics systems typically function.

Instead, the commission reviews disclosures and provides guidance when potential conflicts are identified. To reiterate, this bill does not eliminate financial disclosure or the Ethics Commission's oversight. Regents will still file disclosures with the commission, which can review them and advise recusals before conflicts arise.

It is also worth noting that the Board of Regents itself maintains a strong conflict of interest policy that requires members to disclose potential conflicts and recuse themselves for matters where those conflicts may exist. That internal policy provides another layer of protection to ensure ethical decision making.

At the same time, we also heard concerns that public disclosure of detailed financial information about spouses, dependent children, or business partners can discourage otherwise qualified individuals from applying to serve on the Board of Regents. This measure seeks to strike a balance between maintaining ethical oversight and ensuring that the university can attract qualified individuals willing to serve.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I understand that some Members have concerns that other boards might seek similar changes in the future. If and when that happens, those proposals would still come before this body and would need to be evaluated on their own merits.

Madam Speaker, I'd like to yield my time.

So ordered.

Thank you. Just as we are doing with this bill today. Each board has different responsibilities and governance needs, and the Legislature retains full authority to determine whether any future requests are appropriate.

Madam Speaker, at the end of the day, this bill strikes a balance between maintaining strong ethical oversight and ensuring that the University of Hawaii can attract the qualified leadership it needs to succeed. These reasons, I respectfully asked for this chamber's support. Thank you.

Moving... Representative Pierick.

Thank you. In opposition. Just want to point out that every Member here, we file those disclosure reports, but ours are public. This would make their financial disclosure reports private, only accessible by the Ethics Commission, which I don't think is fair.

Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition. The public deserves greater transparency, more open meetings, and more financial disclosures that are publicly accessible. Not less. Only the current Regents supported this bill, and I agree with the numerous testimonies in opposition to this bill, which were the Ethics Commission, the Public First Law Center, League of Women Voters Hawaii, and the Society of Professional Journalists.

I don't know how many people know, but when a board of, when a UH Regent is selected to take their seat, they are actually, the council sends up numerous names to the Governor in that selection process. So there are many people who are willing to disclose their financial interests and have them publicly available so that they could. There's no shortage.

Just as there's no shortage of Representatives here who are willing to disclose their financial things to the public in order to serve in a very open, in a very open and transparent way. I also do have issues with the limited exemption for the strategic plan meeting.

As someone who served on the Board of Education, we had strategic planning meetings that were open to the public. And there's, why would we need to keep it secret? We're not discussing, you know, things that are going to be, the public deserves to know what we're discussing. Thank you.

Moving on to standing committee report... Representative Cochran.

Or 1102. I stand in opposition. And because... Thank you. I agree with more open transparency and inclusiveness. And I've always been a strong support of Sunshine Law. So that's my opposition. Thank you.

Moving on to standing committee report 1104. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Apologize, but can you go back to 1102 when the there is time?

Okay, let's go back to 1102.

Reservations.

So ordered. Moving on to 1104. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservation.

So ordered. 1106. 1108.

Speaker, I'm sorry.

Representative Shimizu.

1106 when time permits.

Okay, let's go back to 1106.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition with a comment, please.

Please proceed.

You know, it's very difficult many times to choose between a yes or a no. In this case, I am in opposition. Supporting agriculture. Now, I want to begin by acknowledging with everyone here that shares the same goal of protecting the health of our communities and the environment in our aina.

However, this Bill would prohibit the use of a product that is very important to local farmers, many of whom are already operating under extremely difficult conditions. Farmers face some of the highest cost productions in the nation, and without a substitute for this product, they will be very much affected.

Farmers who farm sweet potato, onions, pineapples, those products that are in the ground, are going to be very affected. I believe we should continue investing in research and safer alternatives and best management practices that support both environment protection and agricultural viability.

But an outright prohibition like this could seriously have unintended consequences for the very farmers that we want to support and achieve sustainability in our state. This Bill was opposed by the Hawaii Farm Bureau, the Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii, the Hawaii Crop Improvement Association, and Dole Foods.

For these, for these reasons, I respectfully urge members to vote no on HB 1880 and can have permission to enter written comments?

So ordered.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Quinlan.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support.