House Standing Committee on Culture & Arts

Hello, everyone. Good morning. Great to see a full committee room here. Thank you for your time. Thanks for joining us. We're gabbling in to our 10:30am agenda. It's gabbling in a little bit late. It's about 10:35. It is Wednesday, 03/18/2026. We are in Conference Room 309 as well as here via Zoom.

We have a couple of measures on the agenda today starting with SB2603SD relating to the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra. Designates the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra as the state of Hawaii Symphony Orchestra requires annual reports to the legislature and appropriate funds. First, we have testimony in support from Amy Iwano, director and president for director president and CEO for the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra.

Thank you. Thank you for hearing this bill. I'm Amy Iwano, president and CEO of the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra and we stand in, strong support of our testimony, and thank you so much for your consideration.

Thank you so much for your testimony. I also have testimony in support from Randy Wong, Hawaii Youth Symphony.

Aloha, chair, vice chair, Repley. Thank you so much for considering this bill. On behalf of the Hawaii Youth Symphony, we really, really believe in the power of the professional orchestra to inspire our kids. As stated in the testimony, we included some video and photos of the side by side collaborations that are so important to inspiring the kids. But also beyond that, it's really about supporting a symphony so that the high artistic caliber of the musicians can thrive.

As they, play in the orchestra, they also give back to our communities by, teaching the kids. They're their private teachers, they're school teachers, They play many, many roles. They're community leaders, and so to have the orchestra here makes it possible for those homegrown musicians to come back and really, you know, play into this, you know, arts and cultural community. So.

Thank you so much for your testimony. We also have testimony in support from the Hawaii Arts Alliance, Gaye Humphrey.

Yes. Oh, I'm here. We I'll come to the podium. Thank you. Good good morning. I'm Gaye Humphrey with Hawaii Arts Alliance. We stand on our written testimony in support of this measure.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for your testimony. I also have testimony in support from Peter Dames, Servco Pacific, as well as Retail Merchants of Hawaii, ABC Stores, Kauai Concert Association times two. The...an individual from the Hawaii Youth Symphony, from the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra and then about 56 other individuals. That's all I have on my in person and Zoom testifiers list. Are there any other individuals wishing to testify on this measure?

Okay. Seeing none, members, are there any questions? Okay. Not on this measure. Again, I just want to mahalo the symphony for doing such a wonderful job of putting together and and gathering so much testimony and support and pushing civic engagement around this measure.

On this measure. I really appreciate it, and it's really wonderful to see. We're gonna move on to our next measure, SB 3007 SD 2, relating to Culture and the Arts. This establishes the Office of Community Culture and Innovation within the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts for administrative purposes, requires annual reporting to the Legislature, appropriates funds, and establishes the Community and Cultural Partnerships Program. Up first on my testifiers list is Ian Robertson from the Attorney General's Office.

Sorry, not Ian Robertson. Charles Lee, Deputy Attorney General, covering for Ian. And so, morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and committee. I just wanna point out two small comments regarding this bill.

First one is that the bill started out as a measure to establish the Office of Community, Culture, and Innovation, but the Senate Draft 2 added section four, which separately appropriates money to preserve and relocate artwork from Aloha Stadium. And that may-- that that new section appears to add a different subject that was not part of the bill as introduced, and so it may create a non-germane amendment problem under the State Constitution.

For that reason, the cleanest fix would be to just delete section four and move that appropriation to a separate measure. And secondly, we noticed that the-- they try to put the Office of Community, Culture, and Innovation within SFCA, but as you know, SFCA is within Department of Accounting and General Services, the ministry they attached, so it would be more proper to have this new office attached to DAGS rather than SFCA. I'll be available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Up next, we have testimony with comments from State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, Director Ewald. Good morning.

Good morning. Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Karen Ewald, Executive Director of the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts. We are providing concerned comments on this measure. I just have a few things to state.

I would like it for there to be more communication from the drafter of the bill with myself and the board before a measure like this is introduced so that maybe we can work together on completing innovative projects that has interest with the legislation.

At a time where there's a budget shortfall in Hawaii, adding a new office would potentially be a poor use of taxpayer funds, especially if we can do the work, and also knowing that if there's a new office with a new positions, that would be an additional burden administratively and fiscally on the staff.

And then such-- lastly, the Works of Art Special Fund was amended last session to not be able to use that fund to move and relocate and preserve works of art. So we would not be able to do that with the Works of Art Special Fund, regarding section four. And I'm happy to answer questions. Thank you.

Thank you so much for your testimony. Thanks for being here. I have testimony via Zoom from HULI PAC, in opposition.

Not present.

Okay. Not present. I have testimony in person in opposition from Solomon Enos.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Solomon Robert Nui Enos. I'm the artist in residence at the Capitol Modern right across the street, and I am here in strong opposition to this bill. You know, democracy is in big trouble right now, right?

And so, one of the first things they do is they're gonna go after the artists, and that's really spooky, yeah? What this bill is is pretty much nothing less than a parasitic kind of a process to insert itself into some place where it does not need to be unless you want to paint great big murals of Dear Leader and mount them on the outside of the Department of Justice building, yeah? In that case, I'm sure all kinds of vanity projects will be available, but not in Hawaii because that's not how we do it.

We living in a time when we are dropping bombs that cost as much as schools on top of schools because of a historic lack of imagination. Go visit the State Capitol, the Capitol Modern. We have an amazing scholastic awards, children's awards. Go look what the children are drawing because they are visualizing a time of peace, and if you're gonna pull the rug under them too, and they're already hanging on to vapors when it comes to trusting government right now-- yeah, we truly are in trouble. So strong opposition and mahalo for this opportunity to talk story and make a little bit of trouble today.

Thank you for your testimony. Thanks for being here. We also have Governor.

Yes. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Governor Abercrombie.

Madam Chair, thank you for the courtesy. It's a great pleasure to be here, and I-- that's not a pro forma statement. This committee was formed in 1975 by myself and Representative Richard Wong, Dickie Wong, from Farrington High School. Dickie was a all-star football player.

I was a long-haired bearded Haole boy from UH that nobody expected to win an election. I'm sure that's familiar with some of you sitting at this table. And they figure, what can we do with these people? And they said, culture and arts. And we loved it. That was our opportunity.

And that's why I came here today full of enthusiasm, and I'm shocked at the statements that were just made. The State Foundation of Culture and Arts, when we put this together, when we-- that was headed by the architect who designed the Arizona Memorial, to have somebody-- and Culture and Arts help, you know, the portraits that are up there of the various governors and so on, so the work of the Culture and Arts folks to make this possible for us. I'm here today as as someone who works-- and boy, I'm telling you. They're so close to the people in Chinatown.

We have worked so hard to put together the very things that are in this bill. This bill is a prime example of the legislative process in work. It started out worded differently, but the legislators have decided, we're gonna try and see what we can do to respond to people in their communities, to their cultural heritage, and so on.

And the State Foundation of Culture and Arts, that's why I came here before against the HCDA being in it because that-- they weren't thinking about this at all. But the State Foundation of Culture and Arts, that's what its job is all about.

It shocks me and pains me. It pains me as someone who served on the Armed Services Committee for 20 years in the Congress of the United States to hear this bill being compared to what's happening in Washington in terms of bombing and murder and terror? This bill has been rewritten by fellow legislators to respond to the cultural necessity of us reaching out, and the bill is very, very shrewdly put together. I wanna compliment, again, the legislators on this. This is not an additional burden.

How can it be a burden to be able to reach out to people in their communities on their cultural legacies? That's a burden? That's not a burden for the Culture and Arts department that I know. The opportunities there is an additional. It's an adjunct. You guys have done a terrific job of putting this together.

It's an adjunct, and it'll be funded as an adjunct. That's what it-- and it doesn't take a lot of people. It takes talent. What it takes is not an extended burden of bureaucracy, but talent and devotion and commitment to the cultural heritage that the State Foundation of Culture and Arts is supposed to do. So let me tell you, for the-- I'm asking the folks who just testified.

Take another look. Take another look. See this as an opportunity to include-- to get in inclusivity, to add to the honor of being able to serve the people of the state. I've gone a little bit long, Chairman Kapela-- Chairwoman Kapela, because I feel so deeply on it, and I feel that the testimony in opposition today has not fully grasped what the in-- the legislative intent is. I think that this is a response to a need that's statewide.

It's not just here on Oahu. I'm speaking about Chinatown, yes, but you you can talk about Banyan Street Drive in Hilo. I can name five or-- the tree just went down out in the little park out in Wahiawa Way. So we need to have a division, if you will, an adjunct to the State Foundation that's gonna be sensitive to that and can bring it to our attention. I'm very grateful for the courtesy you've extended to me. Thank you very much.

Governor, thank you so much for taking the time to be here with us. It is a privilege to have you in this room, and I never imagined that a governor would be testifying in front of our committees.

I'm sorry. I just sat down. I couldn't see you.

No. It's okay. Thank you.

But you're the same-- you're the same as me, right? Us short guys have to stick together.

At least I'm in good company. That's all I had on my testifiers list in person. I will note that we have testimony-- oh, I also have--excuse me--Dean Sakamoto in person, in support. Aloha.

I'm gonna stand just to the side so that I can look at the governor, too. Thank you very much for this opportunity. My name is Dean Satoto Sakamoto. Remember?

I'm an architect with an interest and expertise in community-based planning and design. I'm also the Executive Director of SHADE Institute, which is a nonprofit public interest design organization based in Chinatown. In my past career, in another life almost, I worked at SFCA as an employee and staff member hanging art, working in Governor's Office. Also served on the board of SFCA with Director Ewald. She was the head of 82 people.

She's wonderful to work with, and I think as Karen mentioned, it's just a matter of communication. And the governor said it best when he said that, really, I think it falls upon the Culture and Arts to do this because another agency said they couldn't do it. So it's really a project trying to find a home, and it's called the Office of Community Culture and Innovation.

And the intent is to create what we call a community action center, which is also working in collaboration with the city and county. So this idea was crafted in collaboration with the Mayor's Office, okay? That's the back story. And little-- we did not think we would be here today, trying to work with SFCA, but I will be delighted to work with Karen and her team because I know what they do. I know them well.

So the issue here is not really an art problem. We have great artists here. It's a design and planning problem because what the Community Action Center is meant to do is to help the city prepare for this rail, which is a huge investment for all of us. And right now, the city has a TOD action plan, but no one to execute it. So I'm in Chinatown every day as others are in other communities, and so the idea is to boots-on-the-ground, get it done, get ready for transit. So it's a planning, design, and economic development opportunity.

Mr. Sakamoto, I wanna thank you so much for your testimony. I also have testimony in support from City and County of Honolulu, Managing Director Formby, testimony in support from PlayBuilders of Hawaii Theater Company, testimony in support from Sanford Carr Development, as well testimony with comments from the Chamber of Sustainable Commerce.

Opposition from Commissioner Brown from the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, testimony in opposition from the HO'A Program, and testimony with comments from the Hawaii Arts Alliance. Apologies, Gaye. It wasn't highlighted this--

Good morning, again, Chair, Vice Chair Kong, and members of the committee. Gaye Humphrey with Hawaii Arts Alliance, here to offer a few comments on this bill. I think the key question that we are concerned with is, what is the problem this measure is intended to solve?

Many of the initiatives proposed in the bill, including community revitalization, public space activation, and cross-sector partnerships are already or can be accomplished through the existing work of the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts. While we appreciate the intent of the measure, we urge caution in creating a new structure without clear alignment to current efforts.

We're hearing concerns from the field about potential duplication, unclear roles, and whether new resources would be added to or diverted from existing programs. At a time when many arts organizations continue to face resource constraints, it's critical that any new initiatives strengthen, not fragment, the systems that currently support the sector.

So, again, we respectfully encourage further dialogue with the arts community to ensure clarity, coordination, and meaningful engagement moving forward. Mahalo for the opportunity to provide testimony.

Thank you so much for your testimony. Thanks for being here. I will note we have testimony in opposition from about eight individuals and support from about five individuals with a couple of comments. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Okay. Seeing none, we're gonna go with questions. I have a couple of questions. First, if-- Director Ewald, if you can come back up?

I just popped gum in my mouth. Sorry.

What does-- what does meaningful as this-- if and as this bill moves forward, what kind of meaningful conversations do you think need to happen between standing up this new office and the foundation, along with the stakeholders that both bring? And how do you envision that looking?

If the-- if an office was actually established? I think that the meaningful conversations that need to come out of this are conversations with the Board of Commissioners and to ensure that the mission of the State Foundation is intact as well, the initiatives that are carried out in this office.

And the communication, really, like I-- was said earlier, I would like to have come from the Legislature to the State Foundation Board and Executive Director early on so that we can address a Chinatown issue, or certain initiatives that need to be addressed, that can be addressed within our culture-- within our--sorry--our agency.

Some of the work-- some of the wording in the measure relates to planning and permitting and things that are-- fall outside of our realm, but that's something that I think just takes more communication and early on as well. I do-- if I may, I do think the idea of having this office attached to DAGS rather than within the State Foundation would make it more efficient because then that attached agency or initiative would then have that fiscal support from DAGS' ASO because our fiscal support is internal and very small.

So I do-- I would like to agree with the suggestion from the Deputy AG's Office that that happens because embedding an office within the State Foundation does not make it faster to carry out initiatives. So I hope that answers your question.

No, that's helpful. The other question that came up from the AG's Office-- this is actually for you, though--

Oh, okay.

--is around the Works of Art Special Fund, specifically transferring the art that's currently located at Aloha Stadium somewhere else. I don't know where you would transfer it because I think it's rather large. In the testimony from Stanford Carr, they mentioned that it could cost up to $1.2 million. Do you folks have any estimates on what transitioning the cost, A, and what transitioning a piece of art of that scale?

I would agree that-- I mean, he would know more than-- you would know, so I would agree with that estimate. It might even cost more than that, to be honest. They're referring to the Volcano Sculpture at Aloha Stadium. That actually has concrete inside of it. It's huge.

It-- and so it needs to be dismantled. That's kind of not the right word to say. But it needs to be taken apart carefully, moved over while the stadium development happens, and then the Art Advisory Committee for the Stadium District will determine where it is moved back. So it needs to be moved, stored, preserved, moved back to wherever they decide to move it back, and then-- and I would say it would cost that much, if not more.

That and-- that being said, that would be out of General Funds now because the Special Fund we cannot move or preserve works of art from that fund anymore. So that's what that is. That's the Volcano Sculpture as well as the Burns Sculpture that-- and they both need to be relocated.

Okay. Thank you.

Temporarily.

Thank you for your testimony.

Thank you.

And then, just a quick confirmation again from the AG's Office. If this section were to be removed, the bill itself wouldn't have any issues around being germane or being able to move forward? There wouldn't be any court challenges later?

I don't wanna say definitively, because anyone can challenge anything--

--but it would substantially lessen the risk.

Yeah.

Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you for your testimony. Members, are there any other questions?

Okay. Seeing none, we're gonna move on to our next measure, SB3019SD2. This is oh, it's relating to consumer protection. Relating to consumer protection prohibits the sale of tickets at a price higher than $3 more than the original price charged by the primary venue ticket provider for events held in the state, authorizes the Department of Consumer Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs to adopt rules to impose fines for any violations. Up first on our testifiers list, we have the Office of Consumer Protection within DCCA.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair. Good morning. I'm the Executive Director. I wanna just introduce myself because I have not had the pleasure of testifying in this committee before and introduce a little bit about the work of our office. We enforce the consumer protection laws in the state of Hawaii.

That means what that means is that we sue people who violate them. Before we get to this point where we're gonna sue somebody, we have tools at our disposal to conduct investigations. We have a staff of investigators, a small staff, and we have a staff of attorneys, also a very small staff. We are the primary consumer protection officials in the state of Hawaii. We oppose this bill, and I wanna just place this in context.

Right now, if a big act came to town, let's just call it Juno bars for for five. Okay? A big act comes to town, and there's problems. You know, there's people report to our office that that they were unable to have their ticket honored or they had a fake ticket or something like that. We'd probably pick up the phone and we would call the secondary seller who was responsible for that transaction or who facilitated the the secondary platform, let's say, who facilitated the buyer seller transaction.

In many cases, as you might hear from some of the later testifiers, we have somebody answer the phone on the other side from the secondary platform, and they can tell the buyer and the seller, they can tell our office what protections they have in place for the buyer and the seller. I was on looking for tickets the other day for myself, and I was pleased to see that there was a buyer guarantee so that if I something fell through with the tickets I purchased, I would be more than likely to give my money back. So I like that. If we pass this bill, it goes away. So instead of us being able to pick up the phone and call a secondary platform, you're probably gonna get complaints about people who bought tickets on Facebook Marketplace and never got the ticket.

We might have 500 of these complaints come in. So my staff of investigators and my staff attorneys would have to go call up every single one of these complainants and say, what happened? You know? What's going on with this? And then we would have to call up the seller, the seller who didn't come through.

Well, good luck getting in touch with that person. So while we're working on these 500 complaints that came in, we're also supposed to be enforcing the rest of the consumer protection laws in the state. So I just wanted to offer you the enforcer's perspective here. And just to, encourage you to think about that and encourage you to think about, sort of the resources, the government resources that would be required to effectively enforce a law like this? Do we really want the primary government consumer protection enforcers taking our time to do this?

So, yeah, I I just wanted to let you know my perspective on it, and and hopefully you'll hear from some other testifiers who will, you know, inform you about the real effects of this because this will result, most likely if this was passed, in the real big secondary platform simply pulling out of our market. So thank you. Thank you. If you have any questions, I'll be here. Thank you.

Okay. Up next, we have testimony, from the Office of the Mayor, City and County of Honolulu. Okay. We also have testimony from the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra in support, in person. Okay. Testimony from the Chamber of Progress. In person.

Good morning, chair, vice chair. My name is Robert Singleton, and I serve as the Senior Director of Policy of Public Affairs to The US West Region at Chamber of Progress. We are a tech industry association that supports inclusive innovation. I'm here today in respectful opposition to SB3019 because we're while we support the intent of the legislation, that is to increase accessibility and availability of attending live events and experiences while protecting consumers from fraud, we were concerned this bill would have the unintended consequences of exposing what would be ticket buyers to black market ticket sales and scams to the detriment of legitimate and compliant secondary markets. Specifically, by mandating a steep and arbitrary price cap of just $3 in the resale of tickets, SB3019 does nothing to increase the availability of tickets and instead only empowers scalpers and malicious actors who operate illegally to further capitalize on the scarcity of the given event or experience.

Research from organizations like Progressive Policy Institute, the Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy, and even the US Government Accountability Office all support this assertion that price caps don't work. Would also direct you to the written comments of the Hawaii Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs who so eloquently summarized this concern as follows. When resale activity moves away from established platforms to provide transaction records, refund policies, payment protections, consumers face greater risks of fraud, nondelivery, and scams. As we've seen in what seems to be the penultimate case of the study of the nuances of regulating ticketing during Taylor Swift's era store, consumers in many countries were mislead misled and scammed to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in multiple instances because of the unregulated and illegal secondary marketplaces. Additionally, this bill introduces a host of other compliance concerns that could lead to even more problems in legitimate secondary ticket marketplaces because of the unique position enjoyed by companies like Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation, who in some cases serve as the event presenter, original ticket seller, and reseller.

Because of this, it's not always possible to know the original price of a given ticket as Ticketmaster does not have to share this information. Furthermore, not all tickets are created equal even for the same event. Tickets can be purchased in bundles or priced differently for multiple tickets in the same area if you want to sit next to your friends and family. Some events event venues offer promotions with discounts for drinks during the show, like for stand up comedy. And even in the way in which people pay for tickets can result in different prices as in the case of a dreaded convenience fee.

Overall, secondary ticket resell markets exist for many legitimate reasons. Not everyone can buy tickets during the initial event offering, and not everyone is able to attend every event that they bought tickets for. So being able to sell those tickets to someone else who can't attend the event is worthwhile. So instead of imposing effective price caps and unworkable client burdens in these secondary marketplaces, why not work with these very willing partners to address the issues that everyone agrees most aren't consumers? Fraud and black market scammers, the malicious use of bots to buy tickets en masse, and the lack of price transparency.

So for these reasons, we remain respectfully opposed to SB 3019 and would encourage you to hold this bill in committee.

Thank you so much for your testimony. I also have testimony in support from the National Independent Venue Association via Zoom.

Chair, vice chair, and members of the committee. My name is Kendall Gilvar, and I'm here on behalf of the National Independent Venue Association representing independent venues, festivals, and promoters across the country, including many in Hawaii. We strongly support SB3019. Independent venues are small businesses, employers, and cultural anchors in communities across Hawaii. They generate hundreds of million dollars of economic activity and support local jobs and surrounding businesses.

But despite that impact, many are truly struggling to stay afloat, and one of the biggest reasons is a predatory secondary ticketing marketplace that is no longer functioning fairly or safely. Fans do everything right. They log on early, wait in line, and try to buy a ticket at face value, but within minutes, tickets are gone. And almost instantly, those tickets reappear online at two, three, sometimes five times the original price. That's not a fair marketplace.

It's a manipulated one, and we now have clear evidence in how it works. A recent US Senate investigation led by Senator Richard Blumenthal found that Ticketmaster and Live Nation actively built and benefited from a system that drives up resale prices, viewing it as a lucrative business opportunity and enabling brokers or scalpers to access far more tickets than everyday fans. They're not the only ones profiting here too. Secondary marketplaces like StubHub and Vivid Seats pick a cut of every single resale transaction. They collect fees from the buyer and the seller, and those fees increase as prices go up.

That means the higher the markup, the more that fans are price gouged, the more money these platforms make. They're not passive marketplaces in this dynamic. They are financially incentivized to see prices rise for your constituents. Even though this has become normalized, you know, fans in Hawaii have been told that this is just how the market works. Normalization just doesn't make it right, and it doesn't mean that it has to be accepted by this legislature.

At its core, the current resale system is an extractive market that pulls money away from local venues, artists, and communities, and redirects it to these large platforms and professional scalpers, often outside of Hawaii. SB3019 is a straightforward way to truly fix this. By placing a regional a reasonable cap on these resale prices, you remove the profit incentive that fuels all the predatory behavior. So the bots, the bulk buying, the the fake tickets, and you begin to restore balance to the marketplace. This approach is is gaining momentum, and Hawaii wouldn't be alone in passing it.

Just this past year, 17 resale price cap bills across 13 states have been introduced, advanced, or passed. And Congress has now pointed directly to price caps as a necessary solution to go after a marketplace that's truly become the wild, wild west. The only groups that consistently oppose these policies are resale platforms and the professional scalpers whose business models depend on price gouging fans. I'd like it to make I'd like to make it known that Chamber of Progress who testified there as well as Ticket Policy Forum who submitted, testimony, These groups accept funding from groups like StubHub and Vivid Seats, and then they push for policies that protect large resale profits behind the skies of consumer protection, and confusion in state legislate legislators across the country. The bottom line from our perspective, is that right now, the secondary marketplace is pricing quiet families out of live entertainment, and and going to your favorite music show has become in inaccessible for your constituents.

This bill would restore fairness, protect consumers, and help ensure that the ecosystem at large were made accessible and sustainable. I'm happy to speak to how other states have been pushing for policies that are truly enforceable within very small state budgets. And I would encourage you to really think about the price incentives behind some of the groups who are opposing this bill. I know there are a lot of Hawaii constituents who are just writing in and saying, hey. I I haven't had the chance to see my favorite show.

It's become far too expensive. For these reasons, we we urge you to, support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you so much for your testimony. We also have testimony in support from the Hawaii Youth Symphony. Okay. And I have testimony from StubHub in opposition.

Aloha, chair, vice chair, and committee members. Chris Delaunay with Sanhi Government Strategies here on behalf of StubHub in opposition to this bill. StubHub was founded in 2000 to provide a secure, transparent marketplace for ticket resale. So every order on the platform is backed by the fan protect guarantee, which ensures that fans either gain entry to an event or receive their money back. StubHub does not set ticket prices.

It operates as a marketplace in which sellers determine listing prices and buyers decide what fits their budget. Now with this bill, it would actually create a resale price cap, and a resale price cap will push transactions into unregulated marketplaces where consumers are more vulnerable to fraud. Fans turn to, other will turn to other channels such as social media platforms, private message boards, and offshore websites where there are no guarantees, no customer support, and no recourse if something goes wrong. An example is Australia that had a price cap. There was a Taylor Swift concert or tour in Australia.

Fans lost $260,000 to ticket fraud after high demand sales shifted to the unregulated platforms. So we know that we've heard from the Office of Consumer Protection how difficult it is to implement this and that there is no reliable way to verify that someone what someone originally paid. So StubHub is supportive of another measure that is currently with the house. This is s b 2031 all in pricing, legislation. And this requires a business must disclose clearly the price of live ticket events before purchase.

So I'm here. I'm available for any questions. Thank you for this opportunity to testify.

Thank you so much for your testimony. I also have testimony marked in person from an individual, Jacqueline Conant.

Hi. Good morning, chair Kapela and vice chair Collins, members of the committee.

My name is Jackie Konant, a resident of Hawaii, and I respectfully offer my strong support, SB3019. I support SB3019 because Hawaii residents deserve a fair, equitable opportunity to purchase tickets at their original price when they are first released. Too often, tickets sell out within minutes and reappear on resale platforms at significantly inflated prices. For many local families, this creates an unfair barrier, forcing them to either pay far more than intended or miss out entirely on events that should be accessible to our community. This issue is especially impactful in Hawaii.

Our residents already face one of the highest cost of living in the nation where everyday expenses from housing to food to transportation are significantly higher than on the continent. In addition, we are geographically isolated. Attending events often requires substantial travel, whether interisland or to the Continental United States or abroad, adding airfare, lodging, and other costs on top of ticket prices. When tickets are resold at inflated rates, it disproportionately affects Hawaii's residents who are already praying paying a premium simply to participate in experiences that others may access more easily. Allowing excessive resale pricing further compounds the financial burden of living in an island state oceans away from most major venues and events.

Resale should not be permitted above the original price paid. Establishing this protection helps ensure fairness, accessibility, and equity for our local community. I respectfully request that you support SB3019 and help protect Hawaii residents from price gouging practices that place events out of reach. Mahalo for your consideration.

Thank you so much, Miss Konant. We I also have testimony in person from, Rick Bartolini Presents.

Good morning, Chair Kapela, Vice Chair Khan, and members of the committee.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and for taking the time to review my written testimony and exhibits. My name is Rick Bartolini and I'm the founder of Rick Bartolini Presents and for the past sixteen years I've promoted concerts in Hawaii bringing artists such as Carrie Underwood, Lionel Richie, Mariah Carey, Journey, Janet Jackson and most recently Josh Groban to perform for Hawaii audiences. I'm here today in strong support of SB3019. For Hawaii residents, live performances are not just entertainment, they are deeply meaningful community experiences where friends and families gather. But far too often when tickets go on sale through the authorized ticket provider, the inventory disappears almost immediately and then reappears on Mainland resale sites like StubHub at dramatically inflated prices.

In Hawaii, this issue came to a head when Bruno Mars tickets went on sale for his Blaisdale Arena performances in 2014. Thousands of local fans were excited to see their hometown hero was coming home. Instead, many residents tried to buy tickets the moment they went on sale only to discover they were already gone and listed on main on mainland resale sites. Of the nearly 1,600 Hawaii residents who waited in line at the Blaisdell box office, only 6% of them actually got tickets. The public back backlash was so intense that it immediately sparked discussions about ticket scalping legislation in Hawaii that made national news.

More than a decade later, the same structural problems remain. The technology has become more sophisticated. The resale markets have become more concentrated. The markups have grown even more severe. Some in the opposition suggest that bot bans has the answer, but bot bans clearly have not worked.

Congress made, automated ticket buying software illegal in 2016. So if bot bans are already banned, I would ask someone from StubHub to explain to this committee how 3,500,000,000 bot requests still overwhelm the Ticketmaster system during the Taylor Swift era tour presale in November 2022, and why tens of thousands of tickets then immediately appeared on StubHub for $5,000 $10,000 and even more than $20,000 per ticket. The reason bot bans don't work is enforcement is impossible. You cannot realistically hold anonymous global hackers operating automated automated systems accountable. The real solution is to remove the profit incentives that drive the conduct in the first place.

Some resale sites claim they protect fans from fraud, but their own consumer records tell a different story. Both StubHub and CP currently carry f ratings with the Better Business Bureau, and thousands of complaints have been filed against these companies in recent years, including reports of invalid tickets, undelivered undelivered tickets, and customers struggling to obtain refunds. This issue is not just about ticket prices. It's also about Hawaii's economy. When Bruno Mars tickets went on sale at the Blaisdale Arena in 201442% of the approximately 17,000 tickets were purchased from outside Hawaii.

Tickets that originally cost $125 were listed on resale sites like StubHub for as much as $7,000 meaning a single ticket could generate a markup of nearly $6,900 that never circulated back into Hawaii's economy. The legislature now has an opportunity to finally resolve this issue that sparked public outrage more than a decade ago and ensure that Hawaii residents have a fair opportunity to attend live performances in our own community. I'd also like to address DCCA's comments about enforcement.

Please, but keep it keep it brief.

Oh, okay.

We need to release our members, and I would like to

Most of those, complaints come to me as the promoter. So I try to resolve them with a ticket buyer. And I respectfully urge you to pass SB3019. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify, honey. And I'm here for any questions.

Thank you so much, mister Bartolini. That's all I have on my testifiers list. I will say that I have There are 39 individuals in support and seven in opposition, with one providing comments. Is there anyone else that would like to testify? Okay. Seeing none, members, are there any questions? Member, Ray Oda.

Question for the Office of Consumer Protection. Thank you. So my foremost concern, if I can add a a little text in the beginning, is for consumers and businesses in Hawaii. So when I ask questions specifically just about the impact for them. But you talked about kind of, like, weighing the thing about protection, but also for the cost.

So, you know, mister Bartolini, before you came up, talked about a ticket that was a $125 being sold for $7,000. Does is something like that a protection that the Con Office of Consumer Protection is looking at, or only the protection for the the, shall I say, the fraud of the purchase? Like, is it okay for somebody to spend $7,000 for a ticket that costs a $125? Should it be okay? Sorry.

There are market forces at work here. If the legislature wants the market to be regulated in a way that that's not okay, they need to take action because that is not per se a violation of consumer protection law.

Okay. So the the position of the consumer protection and opposition is solely about the protection and not about the prices the consumers are paying?

No. I wouldn't say that. You know, there's obvious concern, and our office was at the forefront of the conversations when Bruno Mars came to town. We worked with those promoters to try and ensure that tickets were available. I think it's absolutely a social concern, and the the people supporting this bill have good points about tickets being available to people in Hawaii at reasonable prices.

How do we get to that point? Right? Our concerns that I've expressed in this testimony is that this is not the way to do it. We've got evidence out there that price caps don't work, and we've invited the folks who are primary issuing parties to talk with us. We've invited the other people out there, the StubHubs and the SeaKees to sit down with us and figure out something that's workable. Okay. We've got crickets so far, frankly. Okay. Let's get a bill together. Let's talk together. Let's figure out how to do something that's actually gonna work. That's an open invitation and I'd rather not be taking up your valuable time coming with an idea that is not fully baked. The commentary from excuse me.

Oh no, go ahead.

The commentary that some of our testifiers advance about, bills like this sweeping the nation, that is not what our research shows. There may be bills, there are not laws that enact this policy.

So for people who have bought, let's say, bogus tickets or people who have felt like they were ripped off by paying too much, has it do you have any knowledge of them attributing that to the since we talked about primary, I'm gonna say I mean, primary, not the secondary market, the venue or the artist. Do people who have those experiences ever blame the people who actually have nothing to do with it, the artist or the venue?

That's a very good question. You know, I don't know that our complainants are are necessarily fixated on the artist or fixated on the promoter, and those issues have been raised in the Department of Justice's antitrust enforcement actions against Live Nation and Ticketmaster. So there is a broader discussion at the federal level and being advanced by many states about whether promoters, particularly Ticketmaster, are involved in collusive practices that drive up the cost of tickets for your average purchasers. In fact, that matters are being litigated right now, in a courtroom, I believe, in Washington, DC. Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong.

Okay. Thank you. Chair, am I able to ask a question to mister Bartolini?

Yeah. You can.

Okay. I know. We're trying out of time. Yeah. Thank you.

Mister Bartolini, I'm gonna give you the same question, which is, are you familiar with her, have had any experience with people who have bought tickets on the secondary market that attribute buying bogus tickets or paying too much and overpricing on the venue or the artist?

Well, they come to me, you know, and

Sorry. Or the promoter too.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I recently had a situation with Josh Groban. Someone purchased a $75 ticket and paid $250, and it was upstairs in the nosebleeds.

Not that there were any nosebleeds at Blightzilla Arena. And so I tried to resolve that situation. I explained to the the the gentleman that, you know, he was he bought it on the secondary market, and he didn't realize that, you know, because of the ads come up, you know, at the top before they even get to the the primary box office. And so that happens a lot.

And last question, I know, because I have to hurry up. Do you know any local promoters, artists, or venues, or any businesses here that have had to rectify that and lost any money to do that, to fix because they wanted to help the consumer who maybe Yeah. I mean,

I did that with Carrie Underwood. So someone got scammed. You know, they paid $9,000 for four tickets, but they eventually got refunded because I wrote a letter to American Express. And and and then I I sold them I sold them the tickets at at face value. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Thanks.

Okay. Thank you so much. DCCA. What kind of educational opportunities do you folks offer to support consumers around purchasing bogus tickets? Because I think that's come up a number of times, and I'm wondering what you folks are doing to support people, to teach them maybe don't buy your tickets off of Facebook.

Those are really good points. You know, I think these things come to a head, right, when we have a baby outcome. And one of the biggest ones was the Bruno Mars one. Our friend alluded to the Carrie Underwood one. And those are moments of inflection where I think that you're probably right that DCCA could take an educational approach and kind of get out, try and get out in front of the issues.

One of the things though is that, you know, in many of these cases, I think there there are some protections in place already through the platforms. And as I mentioned before, a price markup is not a violation of the law currently. Right? So we don't have necessarily a legal violation to pursue in that case. It it really is without a law in place, a case of buyer beware, and the market is going to set the price for these tickets.

We wanna do things like make sure you go into the transaction fully informed, eyes wide open. How much is the price gonna be? So we we support stuff like price transparency. Right? So that you know upfront when you get on the website, this is the price, and you're not gonna get ten minutes down the road and the price is something else because the convenience fee is tacked on, which is another issue that, we've taken with the secondary platforms.

We've taken that up, you know, with that with them before. Okay. I hope that answers the question.

Yes. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. StubHub?

would ask, but they weren't here. So I think StubHub, is a really good space for for this as well, similar similar platform. When we're looking at secondary markets, a number of testifiers reference the Taylor Swift Arris tour. They reference people being pushed into, like, the black market on Facebook marketplace wherever, and that consumers lost $300,000 of money to to bogus tickets, essentially. But I think my question is at the same time, and and it was brought up in some of the other testimonies, that tickets were going for $5,000, $6,000, $33,000 in some in some cases, whether it was Canada or Ireland or The United Kingdom around those Taylor Swift concert tickets. So I think one of my questions is how much do you have an estimate of how much money StubHub might have received in some of those price gouging that happened around

Well, that was the unregulated ticket market, right, where those tickets were sold?

They were sold on Ticketmaster.

And I don't I don't have the the ones that are sold. If they're selling stuff up, I don't have the specific numbers that you're looking for. Yeah.

Okay. If one of the things that also came up is that in when purchasing tickets, there is an issue around how much money can potentially an an an individual ticket can be bought for. However, that seems to be one of the issues as to why you folks don't support, like, a a ticket cap, right, the $3 cap. You can't figure out exactly how much money it's gonna cost to to purchase the original ticket. Help me understand that and what that looks like. Well Why you wouldn't be able to tell us what it looks like.

Is because we're we're a regulated platform. Right? And if we don't have that in place, actually, everything's gonna go to the underground marketplace. And we ensure, like I stated before, we ensure Yeah.

But at a certain point, if you're selling a ticket secondhand, someone had to have bought that ticket. So you can't tell me that you don't have information on the original ticket price and use that as a reason as to why you can't support a measure or or even oppose a measure a measure like this. That can't be a valid argument as to why, like, a cap on a resell is impossible because someone had to have bought that ticket if you're reselling it

to a regular platform.

Yeah.

I don't

I don't have that information. Yeah.

Okay. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Members, any other questions? Okay. That's all the questions that I have on this measure. We're gonna move on to, HB 2795 relating to the Hawaiian flag. I have the opposite, excuse me, 3022 relating to the Hawaiian flag. 3022 relating to culture and the arts. Department of accounting and general services director, comptroller Keith Regan.

Thankfully, I am not the comptroller. But on behalf of comptroller Keith Regan of the Department of Accounting and General Services, I am doctor Adam Jansen, your state archivist and administrator of the public archives. We stand on our testimony in support of this. And as a keeper of public memory, I am so excited for this because this moves us from being reactive about capturing Hawaii's history to honoring those who have dedicated their life, their time, their talent, their energy, their passion to benefiting society. And not just giving them a picture on the wall for a year, but committing to preserving what it was that they did that was so worthy of being thus honored.

We are being proactive about capturing their history and holding them up as role models for future generations in 12 different fields. You name it. Food, art, music, politics, business, it's all there. And so I appreciate the opportunity to testify and stand in soul excitement for this and am available for any questions that you may have. Thank you.

Thank you so much, mister Jensen. We also have testimony in support from the Commission on the Status of Women.

Morning. Yasmin Chaney for the Commission on the Status of Women. We stand on our end testimony in support of this measure as it aligns with our goal of increasing the visibility of female contributions, achievements, and leadership in Hawaii. Thank you for your consideration and support.

Thank you so much for your testimony. We have testimony, in support from the Hawaii Youth Symphony as well as, playbuilders and playbuilders of Hawaii theater company, Hawaii Arts Alliance, also in support, and one individual. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Okay. Seeing none members, any questions?

Okay. Seeing none, we're gonna move on to the next measure, the Hawaiian flag measure, SD 2795 SD 2 relating to the Hawaiian flag. Up first, we have, office of Hawaiian Affairs in support in person. Okay. Not present.

We also have testimony with comments from an individual and one individual in support. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Okay. Seeing none, Members, any questions? Seeing none, we're gonna move on to, SB 2256 relating to brother Joseph Dutton Day. Up first, we have Department of Accounting and General Services.

Still thankfully not the comptroller. Still thankfully your state archivist, AG stands in support of its testimony in stands by its written testimony in support of this bill. We as a state have passed a lot of day of bills over the last few years. Yet here's an individual who dedicated 35 years of his life to carrying for the afflicted, the exiled, and thankfully had the foresight to deposit his papers in the state archives. We have his diaries, his photos of what he achieved there.

And we are very excited about the opportunity to digitize those and make those available to DOE, to the state everywhere, to understand why brother Joseph Dutton 35 years of his life is so important of being remembered. So thank you for this opportunity, and I stand ready to answer any questions.

Thank you so much for your testimony. We also have testimony in support from the Joseph Dutton Guild.

Chair Kapela, Vice Chair Kong, and Mmbers of the Committee. I'm Patrick Boland, representing the Joseph Dutton Guild. We strongly support the bill, the merits of which are well expressed in section one and briefly in my testimony, and I won't take, time to read it all. Little historical note, I'd like to, note that there already is a father Damien Day. That bill was introduced in the 1970 something by young Representative Neil.

I'm sorry.

And we thank you for that. I've attached to my testimony to an earlier sanitary. They're 91 and a 102 years old, and they don't easily navigate Zoom or Internet submissions. They point out that recognizing Dutton also honors them, the people they serve. We would ask that the bill be passed without amendments, including the effective date of upon its approval, thereby avoiding the perils of the conference committee process. Thank you.

Thank you so much for your testimony. I also have testimony in support from, Brenda Duarte.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members.

I've already submitted written testimony, and I just wanted to stand on that written testimony. I have, several I'm a descendant of a few of patients in Kalapapa. And as you saw, Pat just said that he had a couple of letters from current residents. I just wanted to stand up here and present for residents who are no longer here be able to do so. Validating via Joseph Dutton, they validates also the presence of the patients, and heaven forbid they ever made that mistake again in life.

Thank you so much for your testimony. In in the effort of time, I'm gonna ask the remaining individuals, please stand on your written testimony. If you absolutely have something to say, please come and say it, but please stand on your written testimony. That's all I have on my testifiers list in person. I have two individuals also in support.

Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Okay. Seeing none, members, any questions? Seeing none, we're gonna move on to SB3250 relating to Liberty and Justice Day. I don't have any testimony or anyone who wished to testify on this measure.

We're gonna move on to SB2147SD1 relating to love my library day. We love the library. Testimony and support from superintendent in person, not here. Also, testimony and support from the Hawaii State Teachers Association and testimony and support from our Hawaii Public Library System, director Aldrich.

We stand on our testimony. Yay, libraries. Thanks.

Alright. And support from the Friends of the Libraries of Hawaii and then two other individuals also in support. Members, are there any questions? Anyone else wishing to testify on that measure? Okay. We're going to, take a quick recess. Okay. We are gaveling back in for decision making on our, 10:30am agenda. Up first is SB 2603 SD one relating to the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra. We do have a vehicle moving in the Senate, but for good measure, we're gonna keep this bill moving as well.

We're just gonna add some technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style, and further to affect the date. Members, questions, comments, or concerns? Okay. Seeing none, vice chair for the vote.

Okay. Voting on SB202603SD1 with amendments. {Voting}

Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you so much, members. We're gonna move on to SB3007SD2 relating to culture and the arts. We're gonna make a number of amendments to this measure. I will just very quickly note that I think that this could be a really important measure as we move forward in creating a cultural and innovative portfolio and strengthening that portfolio for the state. But we are gonna make a number of amendments based on some of the comments and testimony.

First, we're gonna require the Office of Community Culture and Innovation to adopt rules. Second, on page seven, lines thirteen and fourteen, we are gonna add some language to better define what living cultural tourism zones are so that we can better help the office meet their mission. On page seven, paragraph nine, we are also going to request that they draft a strategic and economic strategic economic and physical revitalization design and design implementation plan for the entire state, starting with the Chinatown area. But at the end of the day, we want this to be a benefit for the entire state, not just focused on one region or just solely the, city and county of Honolulu. This could be a benefit, as mayor mentioned, for Banyan Drive or Hawaii Island and Kauai as well.

We are gonna remove Section four, the works of art special fund appropriation based on the AG's testimony. I think that it's cleaner and safer for us to do that. The purpose of the appropriation in Section four doesn't necessarily fall within the works of art special fund. So for the integrity of the special fund, we are gonna move, remove that. Based on the AG's comments, we are also gonna be establishing this office within the Department of Business Economic Development and tourism as we are working to shift SSCA over, to DVET as well and once again build out that creative portfolio for our state.

I think this is a better, cleaner way for us to be able to move that vision forward. And we are also gonna ask for, we're gonna ask that, we're gonna insert some language to, better support communications between SFCA and the office, that is being established within this legislation for consistency and better planning and innovation for our state. We're finally gonna add technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style. Members, are there any questions, comments, or concerns?

Sure. Thank you, chair. I have four young gentlemen there, my interns for from high school, and they have dissected all the bills actually and came came up with a conclusion that I should go with reservations and I concur. They have their reasons, but I won't explain it for the sake of time. But I will do with reservations.

Okay. Thank you so much, vice chair. Thank you, interns. Anyone else? Okay. Seeing seeing that vice chair for the vote, please.

Okay. Voting on SB3007SB2 to pass with amendments. {Vote} Are there any more reservations? Any no's? No. Okay. Chair, your recognition is adopted.

Thank you so much, members. We're gonna be moving on to SB3019 relating to consumer protection. To begin, I just wanna say thank you to everyone who testified on all sides of it. I think this is a really important conversation for us to have. I appreciate the lobbying that was done and the opportunity to learn more.

With that, one of the things that we're gonna be doing is we're gonna change the $3 cap to 10% to allow a little bit more flexibility and a potential transition. I don't necessarily think it's within the, the committee on culture and the arts purview to look at, consumer protection language around strengthening bans on bots as another option, brought in by, DCCA and some of the other testifiers. But I'm gonna, note in the committee report that I would like the CPC committee to take a look around adding language like that, as of this measure moves forward. We're also gonna be adding technical amendments for clarity, consistency, and style. Are there any questions, comments, concerns?

Well, again.

Vice chair.

Well, thanks to the young gentleman that I mentioned. I will be going again with reservations.

Thank you so much, folks. Thank you.

Anyone else? Okay. Seeing none, vice chair for the vote.

Okay. Voting on SB3019SB2 with amendments. {Vote} Are there any more reservations?

Okay. Reservations here as well.

Okay. Let's see. And any no votes? No. Your information is adopted.

Thank you so much, members. We are gonna move on to 3022 relating to culture and the arts. We are gonna be adding technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style. Members' questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none, vice chair for the vote.

Voting on SB3022SB2 with amendments. Are there any noes? Any with reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you so much, members. Yeah. Moving on to the next measure, SB 2795 SD 2 relating to the Hawaiian flag. We, we are gonna move this forward with technical amendments, speed it for clarity, consistency, and style. Questions, comments, or concerns?

One comment. Yes. A bill like this is very important as somebody who is a homeowner in FOB by Gentry, which is the start of this. I want I I from my estimates, I think in 2024, this would affect, if you look at co ops associations, and condos upwards to 200,000 peep 200,000 units in our state. So it's something that, would affect a lot of people.

Thank you so much. Seeing no other comments, Vice Chair for the vote.

Okay. Voting on SB 2795 SD 2 with amendments. Are there any notes with reservations? Recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Moving on to SB 2256 relating to brother Joseph Dutton Day. Members, we're gonna be moving this measure forward as is. Questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Okay. Voting on SB 2256, as is. Are there any no's with reservations? Seeing none, recognition is adopted.

Thank you so much, members. Moving on to SB 3250, SD 1 relating to Liberty and Justice Day. We're gonna be moving this measure forward with technical amendments needed for clarity, consistency, and style. I'm gonna request that the next committee take a look at, whether or not, flags can be flown at on state lands at half staff on Liberty and Justice Justice Day. And if this is allowable under federal law, I think that's a better fit for the judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee to take a look at and potentially make amendments with that.

So with that, are there any questions, comments, or concerns? 3250.

Okay. I'll go to your SB 3250 SD 1 to pass those amendments. Any noes with reservations? Seeing none, recommendation is adopted.

Thank you so much, members. Moving on to our last measure, SB 2147 SD 1 relating to Love My Library Day. We are going to move this measure forward just further defecting the date. Are there any questions, comments, or concerns? Okay. Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on SB 2147 SD 1 to pass with amendments. Any noes with reservations? Seeing none, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you, Members. We are adjourned.