House Standing Committee on Agriculture & Food Systems

Good morning. This is the, Committee on Agriculture and Food Systems in Conference Room 325 here at the State Capitol, scheduled today for 03/18/2026. Thank you for being here and the folks on Zoom. My name is Matthias Kush. I'm the vice chair of agriculture and the chair, Corey Chung.

Switching up roles today. Keep it fresh for you guys. Bob and weave some ground rules will go over here and I'm just going to read them off because morning hearings must adjourn prior to floor session at noon. I'll testify as all testifiers may have the opportunity to testify in that event. Know that your written testimony will be considered by the committee.

In order to allow as many people as possible to testify, There's a two minute time limit, per testify. For those on Zoom, please keep yourself muted, and video off while waiting to testify. And after your testimony is complete, The zoom chat function will allow you to chat with the technical staff only. Please use that chat for technical reasons only. If you're disconnected and unexpectedly you may attempt to rejoin the meeting.

If you're disconnected while presenting testimony, you may be allowed to continue of time permits. Please note that the house is not responsible for any poor Internet Internet connections on the testifiers end. In the event of a network failure. It may be necessary to reschedule a hearing or schedule a meeting for decision making. In that case, the appropriate notice will be posted.

Please avoid using any trademark are copyrighted images if you're on zoom in the background. And then please refrain from any profanity or uncivil behavior. Such behavior may be grounds for removal from the hearing and without the ability to rejoin. Finally, we have a new microphone system in the house conference rooms and microphones are in the ceiling, so please be aware that any side conversations will maybe picked up. We are listening.

No. Just kidding. You see the green lights up there. Thank you. So, on our agenda today, first up, we have sb 2885 sd one.

It's relating to biosecurity. Beginning in 01/01/2027 establishes mandatory handling and storage rules for commercial and residential coconut rhinoceros beetle host material to reduce the spread of CRB within infested zones and to prevent the spread into non infested zones. Establishes penalties and as a defective effective date. We have 21 people in support, zero in opposition, and one comment on this measure. And first up to testify, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

Hello, chair, vice chair, members of committee. Riley Yu from the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. We stand on our written testimony and support. Thank you for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have Patrick Chee from DLNR. In person?

Yes. Aloha, chair, vice chair, member of the committee. We support this bill. We believe that, it definitely gets to to the point of of trying to reduce the spread of coconut rhinoceros beetle. We do note that there are additional methods that, may not be mentioned in this bill at the moment that could be considered.

The the, Hawaii's COVID-nineteen retroactive fetal response project has many science backed methods that, could be added to the bill if necessary. So, I'm available for questions.

Thank you. Next up on Zoom, we have Maya Hunter from Maui County Department of Agriculture.

Aloha, chair, vice chair, and member of the committee. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify on this important measure. Maui County Department of Agriculture stands by our support testimony, and we'll remain on the call for questions.

Thank you. Next up, we have Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Morning, vice chair, chair, member. Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. It was done on written testimony supporting the intent. Thank you.

Next, we have Marvin Min from Hawaii Earth Recycling with comments on Zoom.

Aloha, chair Chan, vice chair Acushin, members of the committee. My name is Marvin Min and testifying on behalf of Hawaiian Earth Recycling. You have a written testimony and would like to briefly summarize our comments on SB2885SD1. As the state's largest greeneries recycler with over thirty years of experience, we respectfully offer several recommendations to strengthen this bill based on practicality and experience. First, erosion control stops and filters should be included in this bill.

DABs has confirmed these materials can harbor CRV as well. Second, we recommend aligning this bill with the existing Department of Health and EPA solid waste regulations, including permit requirements for all commercial green waste processing, storage, and distribution. This will provide consistency across agencies with compliance, clarity, and enforcement statewide. Third, we encourage allowing future approved treatment methods produced in the state of Hawaii and validated through the University of Hawaii laboratory testing. This supports local innovation while while reducing reliance on imported and potentially unapproved biological controls.

Finally, we recommend replacing the sixty day turning requirements with the established process to further reduce pathogen standards. Turning alone is not effective without sustained thermophilic temperatures. And PFRP is already a proven and regulated approach under the Department of Health, The United States, and the United States Composting Council standards. Mahalo for this for this opportunity to testify, and I will be available for any questions.

Thank you. Next up, we have Hunter Haviland from Hawaii Farmers Union in support.

Thank you, chair, vice chair, committee member, Hunter Hevelin on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. We will stand on our written testimonies. Thank you.

And lastly, we have Joy Shih, individual in support on Zoom.

Good morning, Chair Chen, acting chair for today, Kusch, and members of the committee. Thank you for hearing this important bill today. Residents, cultural, environmental, and industry groups are all eager to see this bill come into fruition. While it's noted just noted by DLNR, there are other methods that we can and should deploy in addition to Mulch management. I'm gonna thank you for raising that point.

This bill would establish a statewide consistent, simple, but meaningfully effective framework, knitting together existing efforts that are, being implemented in regional and county efforts already. As long as there are gaps, there will be confusion, and CRB will continue to spread. CRB is manageable as as we have seen in other island nations, such as Samoa, Palau, and Fiji. It just requires the concerted effort. And the sooner we act, the less it will cost our seat to manage.

So for the opportunity to testify. I am available to answer any further questions.

Thank you. That's, everybody we have on our sheet here. Is there anybody else wishing to come forward?

Department is here, and we stand on our testimony and

State your name.

My name is Eliza, and I'm from the Hawaii State Tax Department.

Okay.

And, we noted one thing that refundable credits are susceptible to fraud and abuse. So, we do have them so we can administer them, but we recommended to make it nonrefundable.

Yeah. I think I think you are are you testifying on SB 2174? Or is there a section in this one to 2885

SB 2925 I'm sorry

to nine to five.

Yeah. I thought you guys were talking about this.

That's right. So it's it all matches together. Okay. Is there anybody else who would like to testify on this measure in person?

Aloha. My name is Daniel Anthony, and I wanna testify in support of this bill. But I I wanna make a point here that's very important is that the people that we're putting our faith in to build this strategy has failed for the last thirteen years because there has been no reasonable effort put into community or cultural consultations.

One of the challenges that the Department of Ag faces is has a culture of chemicals, not one of community and food production, and this is proof in the actions that they have across the community. I deplore you to amend this and to add a cultural advisement position into this so that the community that subsists from coconuts yeah.

Let me tell you this. So far, the strategy to fight coconut rhinoceros beetle has never been for coconut trees. It has been for landscape palms. And I ask you, those that would hold the Department of Ag accountable, to really question their use of the terminology of coconuts if they really mean landscape palms. And that because they don't have anyone that is holding them accountable, it has been thirteen years of do whatever you want.

And here we are today asking to give them more support when in actuality, we are here because of them. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else?

My name is Amy Lowell Boylan. I'm with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. I you submitted all of our testimonies written only, but we are here. So we do stand on our written testimony in support. Just wanted to highlight that some smaller operations may not have the ability to acquire the equipment or staffing needed to meet the requirements of this measure.

So I just wanted the committee to respectfully encourage you folks to consider technical guidance and cost your support.

Thank you. For the is there anybody else who would like to testify on this in person? Maybe on Zoom. Okay. Moving on our next bill.

Oh, I'm sorry. Question. Sorry. Rookie maneuver. Any questions for our chief. Deputy or chairs?

For department of ag. So this bill requires you to enforce if it passes. How would enforcement look like? Are you folks even able to enforce this considering it's it's requiring commercial items and mental health?

For solid waste, that's really Department of Health responsibility, but we would enforce it with inspection, working with the comp working with the composting, the retail side. We have our policy has been educate before you regulate or, in this case, educate before you actually penalize. So that would be our enforcement. But I do have a subject matter expert here. And if you Jonathan?

Oh, he just stepped out.

Oh, we just stepped out. Okay. But but that but, may I make a comment before it unrelated comment, respectfully? You know, with the recent rains that washed that may might have washed away some of this green waste in piles of of CRB hosting material, If if that occurred in your neighborhood or in your community, please don't create another pile.

It's a good opportunity to start fresh, and I'm sorry to with all the damage that did occur, but that would be what we could one of the measures we could do for CRB control.

And, maybe Jonathan will walk in to it. But, Esther, do you have anything to say about CRB? I think sorry. That would be it. We would regulate before we, we would educate before we regulate oral penalties.

Is that is that good? Okay. Thanks.

Actually, wait. Sure. One of the questions I had reviewing this bill was, how do you in your mind, looking at this, how would small farmers in distal regions like on Hawaii Island where we don't have municipal rubbish pickup, Everybody takes their rubbish to the transfer stations. Not all transfer stations have greenway sites greenway sites at the regional areas that could be 40 miles away, like driving from Waialua to Hawaii Kai to drop your green waste. They're only open a couple days a week.

I mean, how do you in your mind, how do you see farmers kind of bridging that gap and and what tools might be out there at at your disposal disposal to make that?

Okay. That's a good question. And we've just we've met a couple times with the counties, quite frequent with the counties because it is a county issue. I guess the way to handle it is more disposal sites, more control of green waste. Apparently, when you do when you trim your tree, that is considered green waste.

But when you start to pile it up and it becomes a product, you might say, it becomes another issue. And that at that point, we can step in. Green waste is, is our is our mandate, but when it starts piling up, we have to work with our partner agencies to move it around. So maybe on a state level, we can assume we can set up green waste places, drop off points, and manage that. We've tried that.

A lot of it had we don't have enough state properties, so to speak, that we can cordon off and designate as a drop off point, but we've considered it. Previous testifier, Daniel Anthony, he has come up with some ideas for drop off points, but it's been problematic. The management, the security, access, liability, it all comes into play when the state manages. Maybe on a private sector side or a community side, it might be a little bit easier to set up jump off points, but it's been a what they call a boondoggle. Yeah. So

Yeah. No. I could I could see it.

That's what I'm it we it's solvable, but we have to get everybody involved, interagency effort, community effort, get everybody involved because it's manageable, but you need a lot of drop off points.

Yeah. No.

That's what you're doing is you're creating another breeding site. Yeah?

Thank you.

Yeah.

Sir, did you

I would just like to state that between 2013 and 2016, the US military was effective in removing coconut rhinoceros beetle from Hickam Air Force Base without the use of toxic chemicals. They used a product called an air burner, which is a smoke free it burns 13 times per hour. So the solution I wrote a GIE this year. I would hope that you folks would support it. Would be to acquire the first private air burner here so that we can mitigate mulch in our communities.

And the reality is that we're asking for the state's help to equip those hard to reach communities with the necessary equipment so that we can fight this in our community. We give us the tools. They might not be effective in managing and using it. I will also share that for the $2,000,000 a year that has gone to CRB response, that has never trickled down to impacting a community. I also want to show this.

This is metarizan anastopoly and this fungus is available for purchase on Amazon. Now I am not making any pesticidal claims, but I can tell you if you go on the CRB response team's website, the the Hawaii Invasive Species Council and DLNR, they all listed as an effective fungus against coconut rhinoceros beetle in Mulch managing this in the Mulch. The reality is what we're asking for is actual collaboration with the Department of Ag. I can't even get these guys to return my phone call. Yeah.

I I call twice, three times a week. They're unable to return our calls, and the solution is not to give them the ball. It's to give the community the ball because that is how it has effectively been fought in other Pacific Islands. Great.

Thank you for your your answer to that. I appreciate that. Any further questions?

Yeah. I had a question from Marvin. I mean, if he's still available.

Marvin still online?

Hi. Hello.

Hey, Marvin. Thanks for being thanks for being here. You know, I I had a question about just the treatments that you you outlined and just, like, you know, what what is the cost to that for for you folks. And if anyone else is required to do this.

I'm I'm not sure. I understand your question. What is the cost for what?

Oh, for the the CRB treatments outlined in this bill. For the heat

treatment? Yes. The management of green waste is a natural process that we go through with with natural composting process to to to to allow it to heat up on its own.

order to to to compost the the the right way, you need to basically grind your green waste and have an adequate amount of moisture and equipment to turn the mulch piles in order to create, the activities of the microbes. It's the activity of the microbes when they work hard, that's what creates all the heat the natural way.

Okay. So So in

Thank you.

Can I ask a follow-up question? Marvin, thanks for being here, and I really appreciate your work and your recommendations for amendments. And I think what chair might have been asking or what I'm curious about is whether including this kind of language would increase the cost of of business in terms of what you are already doing at Hawaiian Earth. So this seems to me to be, like, within the scope of what you folks are already doing.

Yes. Representative Perruso, you're you're correct. It's it's just we we go through this process. It's required that that we do this based on the State Department of Health requirements, the United States EPA, as well as our United States composting council standards. This is what we do already.

And again, by by just saying to to mechanically turn the piles in sixty days, that is not in any of the regulations today because it's it doesn't make sense if unless the pile gets heated up to reach temperatures of 131 degrees minimum.

So is quick followup? you is your operation alone in having already adopted these practices? Or are there other operations maybe on other islands? I don't think there's any other operations similar on Oahu, but I'm not too sure about the neighbor islands.

No. Every every, permitted facility, goes to the same requirements.

And they would be up to they would not require any, kind of modifications to, come like, be consistent with these amendments?

Yeah. No. Good. It's a good question. The the consistency, and that's what I mentioned in my summary, is just by following our Department of Health requirement, which would basically just be environmental mitigations of of odor control, leachate control, stormwater, invasive species control, fire control, etcetera.

We we all have to as long as you have a a State of Hawaii Department of Health permit, we all have to file that same permit. You know, we have our our our other branches on the Big Island as an example. We go through the exact same process. There are other composters as well that that are permitted and go through the same process as well.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Joe.

So quick follow-up, Marvin. Thank you again. So most of these amendments are basically following DOH regulations?

Exactly. Which follows the EPA regulations.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Without further questions, moving on to the next bill, sb 2174 sd two relating to agriculture. Hang with me.

This is a longer paragraph. Authorizes the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to declare an emergency quarantine when it has been reasonably determined that there is a threat to agriculture on the environment in the in the state.

Authorizes the department to halt operations related to or within the affected area for ninety six hours, subject to extension by vote of the Board of Agriculture and Biosecurity, authorizes the department to quarantine any business or other area that is known or reasonably suspected to be infested or infected with any pest, requires the department to provide certain notices to affected farmers and provide compensation, authorizes the department to establish interim rules governing the transportation of any material within the state known to harbor or transport high impact invasive species or pests.

And, we had, six in opposition I'm sorry. Six in support, one in opposition, and two comments on this.

First up to testify in person is department of agriculture and biosecurity.

Chair, vice chair, members of the committee. That stands on his written testimony and support. I'm here for any questions.

Thank you. Next, we have DLNR, Patrick Chee.

The department stands on its, testimony in support. We also definitely support that the, the expanded amended authority of Deb to declare, an emergency quarantine. It is very critical within those, first few hours of understanding, an invasion to, act quickly and to do something in order to reduce the impacts of invasive species. I'm available for questions here.

Thank you. Next up, we have Brian Miyamoto from Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Hawaii Farm Bureau stands on its written testimony providing comments.

Hunter Hevlin, with comments, Hawaii Farmers Union.

Yes. I'm a Zoom person today. Thank you chair, vice chair, committee member Hunter Hevelin on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. You'll have our written comments. We support, the amendments that were added previously, and earnest that added compensation for producers but would like to see if this measure is to move forward.

These are extraordinary powers, that would be given to the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity And we think that they should come along with the expectation of collaborative communication and outreach to the agricultural sector through partners, many of whom are in the room, as well as a mechanism to understand the efficacy of such quarantines. What was proposed in our written testimony was something like say, ninety days later, let's have a report to the board of agriculture about was this effective?

How what was the impact to the agricultural economy? What was the impact to the spread of invasive species? To understand whether this extraordinary power is one that should continue to be utilized. Happy to answer any questions. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Those are all the people we have listed. Is there anybody in person who would like to testify? Anybody on Zoom? No? Oh.

Daniel Anthony here again, guys. Normally, I I would say I would wanna support this bill, the intention of this bill, but I I wanna tell you that there is a great distrust of the Department of Ag amongst small farmers and community members.

And this would be giving, like, a child with no transparency, some type of weapon to hold the the the parents, accountable. And so I implore you guys to to really focus on having the Department of Ag build strong community relations before giving them the ability to have such great power. Thus far, what I have heard many, many times is that the culture is forgotten and that they can't enforce what they already have on the books.

So by giving them more power in which they cannot enforce what they already have leads me to believe that it will be based upon favoritism and the status quo of looking the other way and misinterpreting their own regulations and rules. Thank you.

K. Thank you. Anybody else in person? Chair or actually, member questions? Chair?

..., question for .... Hi, Jonathan. So my question is, so last year, we gave DAB the power to declare a biosecurity emergency. How would this differ, and is this needed if you already have that authority?

So the oh, sorry. Jonathan Ho, plant quarantine branch manager department of Ag Bio Security. So the way they differ is the boss security emergency requires governor approval, which this is a department only function.

And the idea here is, like, we we do have some authority in administrative rules to to do something similar, but I think having statutory authority for a short period to to manage that so that we can get in and do what needs to be done is I think kinda what the intent is without having the governor approval. And the governor approval one also has much more sweeping powers.

You can start, you know, taking land and reimbursing people and funds and things like that where this is just regulatory authority for the department for essentially incipient pests. It wouldn't be for stuff that's widespread. And we're we tried to clarify a lot of that as it was being made, as it went through the prior iteration.

So, yeah, on the rules, you do have authority to point to? Yes.

Quick quick quick question. So would this be considered kind of an intermediary step to the powers that were described last year during the biosecurity?

Yes. That that is something that could be done. I think the only difference with this one is that the the time frame is relatively short for the I I mean, I'm not sure how quickly emergency declaration through the governor would conceivable depending on, you know, pest and the level of infestation that's that's determined in in the 96 hours. You could do one and then the other. So you you could do both.

So it's like an intermediate it could be an intermediate step. Okay. Yeah. We're trying to thank you, Hunter. I'm sorry, chair.

No problem. Did you have a question?

You know, in your testimony, you talked about the, coordinating with farmer organizations and then the, post evaluation report. Like, could you describe how that organ how coordinating with organizations would look?

The department consistently relies having been deprived of an effective statistical service for the past decade on on national statistics to have an understanding of the scope of agricultural activity in the state. That data affords little in terms of outreach into agricultural communities.

And while there are there's a growing effort with efforts over the past couple of years to build some databases and understanding, concern is that if, enforcement to this degree were to be implemented, that the communication would not necessarily be rapid or sufficient to ensure awareness is is actually had amongst agricultural communities, and particularly since the compensation, that we'd advocated for was written into, you know, the existing version of bill.

If people aren't aware that they're under a quarantine or aren't aren't aware that they could potentially and should be compensated for losses as a result of that quarantine, the concern is then that this would have considerable deleterious effects to the agricultural economy. And so ensuring that there's robust outreach is one mechanism to try

and make this a little bit more palatable. Okay. Via, like, organizations like Curacao?

Yeah. Like Farmers Union, Farm Bureau, Cowlands, a variety of other, entities across the islands that maintain day to day contact from a non regulatory experience with with producers. And then on the far end of it then saying, if we are going to be implementing these kinds of things, are they actually effective? Or are we just putting in hardship upon the already beleaguered agricultural sector without much out outcome in terms of invasive species management. Okay.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Any other question, chair, members? Okay Without further questions, we're going to move on to our next bill. SB 2,925 SD one.

That's related to coconut trees. Establishes recognition of coconut trees as a source of food and water as a cultural treasure. Requires the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to establish rules to allow the use of coconut tree seed banks in the state.

Requires owners or operators of property where any coconut tree is located to post and maintain a sign that clearly indicates that the coconut tree is a landscape palm where applicable, requires the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity to establish labeling standards for nonconsumable landscape palms, establishes an income tax credit for consumable coconut trees maintained through natural management practices as a defective effective date. We have nine in support, zero in opposition, and three comments.

First off, in person, we have Department of Ag and Biosecurity.

... vice chair members of the committee DAB stands on its written testimony in the comments.

Okay. Thank you. Next, we have, you twice, Department of Taxation. Yay. Here's your time.

Department of Taxation will stand on its written testimony with comments.

Thank you. Thank you. Heather McMillan, DLNR on Zoom.

Aloha. Good morning. Heather McMillan representing DLNR. We stand on our written testimony in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have Maya Hunter, Maui County Department of Agriculture on Zoom in support.

Hello, chair, vice chair, and members of the committee. Maya Hunter here, representing Maui County Department of Agriculture. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify on this measure. Our department stands in support and stands on our testimony and is open for questions.

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto from Hawaii Farm Bureau in person.

Hawaii Farm Bureau stands on its testimony with comments.

And Hunter Hevelin, Hawaii Farmers Union in support on Zoom person.

Zoom. Live Zoom. Hunter Hevelin on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. We're in support of a number of the aspects of this measure, from supporting producers who are actively cultivating new. One amendment that we would like to see, however, is a look around the labeling requirements.

I think that the landscape palm labeling aspect be limited to public lands and lands that are generally and publicly accessible, so as not to incur upon the private activities of land managers that are not adjacent to publicly accessible areas. If I'm clear in that, I'll drop the floor.

Okay. Thank you. That's everybody we have listed. Is there anybody in person who would like to testify on this measure?

Aloha, Again, the written only we're here. We stand on our written testimony in support of this measure. You is part of a network of native clients and that has sustained our community since time immemorial. And so recognizing Niu as a food and water source and affirming its cultural significance ensures that these relationships to aina are preserved and carried forward for our future generations. And the loss of our new comes with the loss of an essential source of food and water as well as our traditional customary practices.

And as our communities face increasing pressures from climate change, rising food costs, and a loss of traditional resources, safeguarding our new against CRB while ensuring they are safe for human consumption, maintains alignment with Malama'aina to better support Hawaii's long term food security. Thank you.

Is there anybody else who'd like to testify in this measure?

Hi, guys. This is the bill that I came for.

I State your name, please. And

My name is Daniel Anthony. I I shared that with you guys because, in my depression over learning about the situation of our coconuts, it I literally had to start carving stones. And I asked I said, what is the solution to this? And that is a representation of the solution. It is four owls combined in one.

It's different perspectives that don't get along, get together, coming together to find a solution. This bill is a community led bill that is asking the tough questions. One, who decided to define coconuts as landscape bombs? I've asked this question. I actually asked it to the board of of of agriculture and biosecurity.

How did it become a landscape palm? Nobody can answer. Arbitrarily someone decided that this most important sacred tree that is protected by the constitution. Because you see, native Hawaiians with lineal ties can go on private lands to gather. Now I ask you, you see a 80 foot coconut tree.

Anybody over here planted that 80 foot coconut tree? Because that was planted prior to statehood. That these trees are actually ancestors that have never once said they weren't a part of our food system. It has not been defined in any regulations nor can we find it that says that a coconut is no longer a coconut. So, yes, it is difficult to label trees.

I understand that, and this is something in this bill we'd be willing to negotiate. But I will tell you this, the liability is removed by simply stating that it is not in our food system. Do you know who the number one supplier of coconuts on the Island Of Oahu is? Tweakers. Uh-huh.

Tweakers. Straight up. I have had to go into this, like, investigative reporter, and the Tweaker economy is funded by all those trees that we don't think are food because nobody gets them. And when they see them at a certain point, they go at night and they harvest them. And where do these coconuts go?

You know, once I was in a community meeting and a member of DAB said that we have to save coconuts for the tourists. That's why we poison them. How many tourists are drinking poison coconuts? Now when I ask what the impacts of drinking a poison coconut, they don't have an answer. When I ask what is the impacts of drinking 20 to 40 poison coconuts a week, now they're concerned.

I feel like the state has a tremendous amount of liability in regards to the health of our Pacific Island community and all the visitors that come to Hawaii to do what? Drink a coconut. So I ask you to really bring those that would question how important this is to the table to have a open discussion. As I've said before, I come here as a collaborator with the Department of Ag asking to be a part of the discussion that is impacting everyone. And I would ask for your folks' help in making that happen.

And I believe that this bill is a major step into regulatory recognition that this is a part of our food system. You know, every fully producing coconut is two weeks worth of food and water. That is more than what the state has for each individual in case of emergency. In fact, 1,000,000 coconut trees on Oahu would ensure that we would survive any disaster for up to two weeks unscathed. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Anybody else would like to testify? Okay. Members? Questions?

Okay. Moving on to our next bill. SB 2798 sd one relating to law enforcement makes permanent the, Department of Agriculture pilot program established pursuant to act two three five. SLH twenty twenty five, renames the program as the agricultural enforcement program and expands the program statewide as a defective effective date.

And we had seven in support, zero in opposition, zero comments I'm sorry. 2198. Nine in support, zero in opposition, and three comments. First import in person, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

DAB stands on for your testimony and support. Thank you.

Thank you. Mike Lambert, DLE in person, Department of Law Enforcement.

Good morning. Jared Rudula, the deputy director. We'll stand on our testimony this morning.

Thank you. Kelvin Wapjan from Hawaii County, prosecuting attorney in support on Zoom. Not present? Okay. Maya Hunter, Maui County Department of Agriculture in support on Zoom.

Aloha, everyone. Maya Hunter from Maui County Department of Agriculture. Aloha, chair, vice chair, and members of the committee. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify. Our department does stand in support of this bill, and I would like to just add for context that permanency of this program would extend the same robust enforcement privileges that are being piloted on Oahu and Hawaii Island to outer islands, farmers, and ranchers that we at MDOA hear from all the time getting impacted by this.

And it would ensure all Hawaii producers, regardless of location, benefit from equal protection against theft, and threats. .

Thank you. Next, we have Nicole Galase from Hawaii Cattlemen's Council in support on Zoom.

Thank you, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. I'm Nicole Galase on behalf of the Hawaii Cattlemen's Council. The Hawaii Cattlemen's Council supports this bill. We know that there's a high need for it across the state, not just Oahu and Hawaii Island. We hope that more prosecutions will lead to more deterrence of crime because currently it's still rampant.

We really appreciate working with the Department of Law Enforcement, but we recognize that they need enough resources to be able to truly help agriculture. Please make this program permanent and statewide, but ensure that the program is funded to its full needs. On top of food production being a high priority for the state, even higher than that is the safety of our community. Mahalo.

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau in support in person.

Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support. In fact, with comments. We'd like to see this statewide because, apparently, we have a tweaker coconut problem with that problem with your address. Thank you.

Just say no to drugs. Hunter Heavlin, Hawaii Farmers Union in support. Okay.

Farmers Union Stands on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. That's everybody we had listed in person. Was there is there anybody else who would like to testify in person on Zoom? K. Members, questions?

I have a question for Daley. So I saw your testimony in support, and, it seemed to be, like, pretty enthusiastically in support of expansion and making permanent this program. And I, don't argue with the intent, but I am concerned about capacity because, in other spaces, we are having to privatize, security at a in our courts because you folks don't have the capacity to even staff our courts.

So we're gonna be paying, you know, some exorbitant amount for private security out of courts, and yet you're asking to expand your duties and your responsibilities. So maybe you can speak to that a little bit.

Yeah. Yes. Thank you very much for that important question, ma'am. So really what we're trying to do is find balance in our statewide law enforcement duties that run the full spectrum and specifically the issue of the new agriculture enforcement program. I'll say overall, we thank the legislature for its support and its continuing efforts to allow us to expand our recruitment by issues of increasing our members pay, our officers pay.

That foremost, that kind of support is absolutely necessary to making sure that we can not only meet our general recruitment needs for deputy sheriffs, but especially in the agriculture enforcement realm. Now there is, a difference. What we see nationwide is a shortage of law enforcement officers and recruitment everywhere, but specifically with specialized law enforcement. For example, DLNR Dole Care enforcement. They recently had a recruitment.

There are over 700 people across the state that applied for a small amount of officers. And we think there are two issues with that. One is a sense of Kuleana towards our natural resources. And the other is there is an attractiveness, an appeal to that kind of outdoor work where you're on the ocean, in the forest reserves, and those kinds of things that are different than the mainstay street law enforcement. We think similarly with agriculture enforcement.

Being out there with the farmers and ranchers, being up in our very scenic places, places that ordinary, people in our communities don't normally get to see every day is a real attraction for that kind of work. It certainly is for me, because in the last several months, I personally have had to go

out and, investigate these types of agriculture crimes. I was just out the other day doing it. It. So we think that that with the agriculture realm, we won't have the kinds of recruitment issues that we are having for example in the court houses and in regular street work that we're having because of that appeal.

So may I have a follow-up question? So aren't isn't the recruitment, like, just a standard basic recruitment so that the deputies all have to have the same meet the same requirements and go through the same process?

So there is

Are you ready to serve in any capacity to which you assign them?

So what we're doing right now is, two things. The first is we're modernizing our training program for every law enforcement officer in the department. You are correct, ma'am. There is a certain basic law enforcement training program that every law enforcement officer gets. With agriculture enforcement, we are designing an enhanced program.

Those officers, for example, need to know how to drive four wheel drive vehicles and they need to know a specific specialized agriculture enforcement

laws that the general police officer in our community that the general police officer in our community doesn't necessarily need to know. You know, we need to know, for example, branding, the mechanics of branding, what goes on in these farms and ranches, and what we can expect to be the daily normal activities that we expect to see. Because much of law enforcement is when things just don't look right.

And so I've spent a lot of time now in our agriculture community on ranches, speaking with, mister Minh who testified in the other bill to understand what the heartbeat every day is in agriculture so that we can create that specialized enforcement program for our new officers.

Can I ask one more question? Sorry. So it sounds to me like the the pathway is longer to become an agricultural specialist or enforcement officer.

Yes.

And and, it also sounds to me like you already have folks within the department who have shown interest and who might be then kind of siphoned off into that work. So then you face a recruitment problem just to fill the the basic ranks. Right? The folks who are staffing at the airport, staffing. Also, we have problems with public security at our libraries, our courts.

So I I I think I am still concerned, and I appreciate that we are doing we are taking some steps to address the shortage. But I I really feel like you are you folks are expanding your responsibilities so rapidly that I'm not sure you can keep up. And so I I'm just skeptical. So thank you. And I that's not really a question. It's more of a comment.

Any other questions or comments from the members? Chair? Thank you. Appreciate your

Thank you.

Without further questions or comments from the Committee, we're going to move on to SP 2,20 SD 1, this related to agriculture establishes a Kuleana Ag. Tech Pathways Program to create career pipelines in the fields of agriculture and agriculture technology. Requires University of Hawaii to collaborate with the Department of Education, Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, Agribusiness Development Corporation, Department of Labor, Industrial Relations, and appropriate community organizations to develop and administer the program. Requires a report to the legislature, appropriate funds, and it has a defective effective date.

We have, 11 people in support, zero in opposition, two comments, two with comments.

And starting off in person, we have Jade Butai from Department of Labor Industrial Relations in support.

Chair Kusch, Chair Chan, Members, on behalf of Director Butai, the Department stands on the testimony of this work.

Thank you. Next, we have the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity and support in person.

DAB stands on as written testimony and in support of your work.

Thank you. Wendy Gady, Agribusiness Development Corporation in support in person.

Mark Takemoto for Wendy Gady, Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members. ADC stands on our testimony in support.

Thank you. And then Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau in support in person.

Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on this written testimony in support.

K. Is there anybody else who would like to testify on this measure in Zoom? Seeing none, Members, questions? Chair, question? Okay.

With that, we're going to move on to SB 2800 SD 1, related to irrigation systems, appropriate funds to the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, Department of Land and Natural Resources, and the Agribusiness Development Corporation to acquire, repair, and maintain irrigation systems in the state. It has a defective effective date. Sorry. I'm falling behind. We have seven in support, zero in opposition, zero comments. And I am off count here.

First off, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity in person.

DAB stands on its written testimony and support.

Thank you. Lauren Yasaka. I'm sorry.

Stands on our written comments as a part of the bill.

Thank you. Wendy Gaiety or?

Yeah. Mark talking as a little less caffeinated version of Wendy Gaiety.

Shh. She might be watching.

Your secret is with us, don't worry.

She stands on our first point in support.

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farmers Union in person.

Farmers Union Bureau, United. Hawaii Farm Bureau, like the former ADC employee, Mark Takemoto's down there with the testimony and in support. Especially, and all joking aside, in light of the recent kona low and the impact to some of our irrigation infrastructure that it could have had on public health.

Thank you. Hunter Hevelin, Hawaii Farmers Union in support.

I'll send our written testimony in support.

Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to testify on this measure? On Zoom? Members questions? Chair?

No? Okay. We're going to move on. SB 1230 SD 2, relating to meat donation. Exempted donation of wild game meat, including access tier by a hunter for the use or distribution by a charitable, religious or non-profit organization to needy persons from certain laws regarding the inspection and transportation of meat. Has a defective effective date.

We have 22 people in support, zero in opposition, and two with comments. First up, Nicholas Vargas from DLNR in support in person.

Nick Vargas with the DLNR. Hi Chair, Vice-Chair, Members of the Committee. We stand on our written testimony in support.

Thank you. HTH Environmental Health Administration, Department of Health with comments in person.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Matt Crono, Department of Health, Environmental Health Services Division. We submitted, testimony with comments. I do want to highlight though that, we do have concerns about the verticality of the food safety program. Obviously, this impacts part of agriculture and biosecurity.

However, they're kind of upstream in the food security world. Moving guardrails in that food security system potentially creates different tiers of safety, especially for most vulnerable communities.

While we absolutely support efforts for food safety and invasive and animal control and such, we do have concerns that if we remove those guardrails there upstream, without consideration for what would be needed to make sure that that food system is safe as it goes into the food stream, then downstream, we may have really unintended consequences that have impact on population. Thank you available for any questions.

Thank you. Mia Hunter from Maui County Department of Ag. in support on Zoom.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, and Members of the Committee. Maya Hunter from Maui County Department of Agriculture. We stand in support of this bill. Just for some context here in Maui County, we are really overrun by access deer in particular. There's a lot of invasive ungulates.

And if we want to talk about safety, let's talk about safety to agriculture, our ecosystems, and our watersheds by these invasive ungulates. This bill presents a really unique opportunity to improve local food security and community resilience by offering a local protein source as the demand of food will only rise and the cost of food only rises here, in our outer islands. And I will be open for questions. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next, we have Nicole Galase from Hawaii Cattlemen's Council in support on Zoom.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Nicole Galase on behalf of the Hawaii Cattlemen's Council. Like the previous testifier said, the invasive deer issue is still really, really negatively impacting farmers and ranchers as well as everyday residents, and the environment. This bill will help to facilitate the removing of these animals while still making sure they go to feeding our communities. And from what I understand, this bill is modeled after Texas legislation where they have found success, with this method. Thank you.

Thank you. Lauren Zerbel from Hawaii Food Industry Association in support on Zoom. Not present. Brian Miyamoto from Hawaii Farm Bureau in support in person.

Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony in support, adding that it's not just access to deer but feral pigs. So, this bill is wild game. Thank you.

Thank you. Ted Kefalas, from Grassroot Institute of Hawaii in support in person. Not present. And then Richard Fuerst, individual in support on Zoom.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Richard First. I'm a hunter- sorry, apparently looking at the wrong camera.

It's a good profile.

I just want to add a few additional comments in in addition to the written testimony that I supported in regard to the valid concerns raised by the Department of Health. With respect to concerns about food safety and absence of inspection, I think it's important to recognize that hunters already have a strong incentive to protect and practice proper field care of wild game. They're the same handling practice they rely on to safely feed their own families and communities.

If the legislature wants to strengthen safeguards further, I would encourage, consideration of a funding partnership between DLNR and Department of Health to expand hunter education programs. They could take on additional training, on field care, processing techniques, and identifying any signs of illness or disease in harvested animals.

Additionally, nonprofit organizations distributing the wild game could be supported in providing clear cooking guidance to recipients so that these meals, for example, cooking wild boar to an internal temperature of 165 degrees, add venison, goat, and sheep to 145 degrees. This would kill off any pathogen concerns. In regard to comparisons to hunter donation programs in states with cooler fall climates, I respectfully note that the fundamentals of proper field care are consistent no matter the geography.

Promptly gutting, cleaning, and quartering remains of game animals after you've harvested them are the most effective methods for preventing contamination. I think it's also worth acknowledging that many Mainland donation programs rely on commercial meat processors, resources that are limited here in Hawaii.

This presents an opportunity, I think, the legislature could consider supporting development of funding commercial kitchens or meat processing facilities that are accessible to the public. That infrastructure would, not only enhance the food safety, but also expand community access to locally harvested protein. Thank you very much for the opportunity.

Thank you. Next up, we have Jackie Keith, individual in support on Zoom. Not present. That concludes all of our listed, testifiers. Is there anybody in person who'd like to testify?

Hunter, please.

Chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members, Farmers Union stands on its unwritten testimony and support. Apologize we did not get something in ahead of time. This is a pretty important measure that seeks to unravel the state maybe tying its own shoelaces together while trying to address food security and ungual management. At the federal level, wild game is not considered an amenable species for inspection if it is not going to be used for sale.

Applying an additional layer of requirements for inspection at the state level seems like we would put ourselves well out in front of federal requirements while seemingly having no benefit as a result.

So, I think this is a necessary measure to ensure that we are in alignment while simultaneously being able to increase access of local proteins that are seemingly are much more renewable than we'd like them to be and simultaneously hopefully addressing some of the myriad concerns that agricultural operations face as a result of invasive species. Happy to answer any questions and mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to testify on this measure? Anybody on Zoom? Okay.

I think I forgot to mention there's 22 people in support, zero in opposition and two comments on this bill. Members any questions?

Sure.

Okay. Seeing none. We're gonna move on to SB 2706 SD1. Relating to workforce development. Establishes a five year agriculture and biosecurity workforce development pilot program within the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity in collaboration with University of Hawaii's Leeward

Community College and the Department of Human Resource Development requires a report to the legislature and sunsets June 30, 2031 as a defective, effective date.

We have six in support, zero in opposition with one and one in comments. First up, we have Patrick Chee from DLNR in person.

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee. We are in strong support of this bill. We believe that there need there is a significant need for a pipeline of biosecurity workers. There definitely are not enough of them applying for a lot of our invasive species biosecurity jobs, and having this in place

would definitely help to fill those positions. I'm available for questions if you could.

Thank you. Next, we have Brenna Hashimoto. Brenna Hashimoto from Department of Human Resource Development with comments in person. Not present. Hawaii Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity in support in person.

or procurement involving agricultural products to award points or preference to agricultural projects incorporating agricultural workforce housing. Report requires a report to the legislature, and it has a defective effective date. We have six in support, zero in opposition, three with comments.

That stands on his written testimony in support. Any questions?

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto from Hawaii Farm Bureau in support in person.

Hawaii Farm Bureau's done on its written testimony in support.

Alrighty. Anybody else like to testify on this measure?

Anybody on Zoom? Members, question? Chair? K. Seeing none.

We're gonna move on to s b three two three three SD1. Relaying agricultural workforce housing requires state agencies, including the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, the Agribusiness Development Corporation that administer agricultural leases, licenses, development programs,

First up, we have Hawaii Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity in person.

That stands on its written testimony with comments before the commission's.

Thank you. Wendy Gady. Agribusiness Development Corporation in support.

Yes. Please stand on our business.

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau in support in person.

Hawaii Farm Bureau is down on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. Hunter Heaivilin, with Hawaii Farmers Union with comments in person.

Chair, vice chair, committee members. We'll send our written comments. Just wanted to highlight that our concern is particularly for smallholders seeking the form of state subsidy that can come through public land access for agricultural operations could conceivably lose

out on their ability to have an equitable playing field to access such lands should they not have the capital to turn their agricultural operations into housing development ones. So a concern that we highlight in these and a few other statutes as we seek to remedy the outstanding

need for both residential and workforce housing is how we may be shifting public land support from being one that is oriented towards agricultural operations to those who are capable of taking on development planning.

So I think the Department of Agriculture in previous testimony had highlighted that maybe some distinction between the type of, program that could or the type of lease that might be offered or the type of operation that could qualify for these types of points is worth considering.

Thank you.

That's everybody we have, listed. Is there anybody else who would like to testify on this measure? Anybody on Zoom? Members, questions?

Chamber of Commerce.

Sorry.

Sorry about that. Chamber of Commerce Hawaii stands on its written testimony support.

Thank you. Okay. What was your name?

Julian Kiavo.

Thank you.

Anybody else? Sorry. Members questions?

Sure. I have a question for DAB.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Member of the committee.

So my question is, I'm looking at this bill and it it's kind of, you know, directed towards DAB and ADC. And so, you know, a lot of the I guess, agriculture leases for DAB are in parks. And I know that testimony must have limited to the AG parks.

How does does it make sense to, you know, do this kind of incentive for housing on agricultural and the AG parks where the lots are a lot smaller?

So you can without trying to guess as to the intent of the bill, as written, its reach is very wide. It seems as if what they're trying to do in this measure is to capture a method or a way for, hate to say it, a joint venture with the state to develop large tracts of land,

hundred, two hundred thousand, whatever acres that they can find into smaller size AG lots, whatever that size is designated. And in doing so, while that process is happening, that there will be a process to provide extra points, so to speak, you know, to, like, when when doing this process.

Or the language of the bill sweeps in actions that the department takes on a monthly basis, which is the assign or the disposition without disposition of just a normal lease, whether it be in an AG Park or a non AG Park or in our in our agricultural enterprise program.

When we award those leases, there's no issue about housing. It's it's it's a particular, say, five acre lease. And and this would essentially make us go out almost to a a public notice to entertain housing on that parcel, which is somewhat in conflict with our existing statutes that monitors housing.

We we allow it after the Board of Agriculture has, gotten a chance to take a look at what the proposal is. And in the past, the department has rejected some housing requests when the housing requests turned out to be mansions instead of farm dwellings.

So that's what we're asking, and we believe that our requested change addresses that by changing the definition or or verifying the definition of an agricultural project into something big.

So, the action of subdivision and capital improvements. Because we'll do our own subdivisions, but not necessarily need capital improvements on it. But we'll do that to accommodate different interests over time that have occurred in this particular area, so to speak.

But we're not intending if we're doing it, we're not intending to put necessary housing on it. I'm sorry for the long explanation.

Thank you, Chair. Any other questions? Okay. Moving on, next, we have SB 2405 SD 1. We have 11 in support zero in opposition, one with comment first up to testify as Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity and person.

DAB stands it's written testimony with comments.

Thank you. Agribusiness Development Corporation in support in person. Testing. PDC.

Thank you. Maya Hunter. You got it on the right on the third time. Maui County Department of Agriculture in support on Zoom.

Aloha. You did. Maya Hunter with Maui County Department of Agriculture. We stand in support of our written testimony. Mahalo.

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau in support in person.

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

Okay. Richmond Luzar from Hawaii Housing Future in support in person. Present. Hunter Heflin, Hawaii Farmers Union in support in person.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members. Hunter Heaivilin on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. We're in strong support of this measure. It, I think emerges from a number of conversations with our membership across the islands who have expressed concern around housing and agricultural land.

This is a zoning issue. This is an affordability issue. And I think measures like the previous one seem to believe that market mechanisms alone will address these problems.

our public lands are going to address this issue is part of what's necessary to address the myriad concerns that need to be understood to effectively increase our workforce housing in the agricultural sector.

However, I think of as I can say as a planner, I think of planning as a field is about addressing market failures and having a collaborative effort with industry, with government, and others to rationally plan a way forward as opposed to believing that just a series of incentives patched, you know, at

Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. That's everybody we have listed. Is there anybody else who would like to

Aloha, Ini O'Bala with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. OHA stands on our written testimony in support of SB 2405. We strongly support the working group's comprehensive scope of work and strongly recommend that all data collected and reported be disaggregated with specific identification of Native

Hawaiian cultural sorry. Agricultural operation operators and workforce participants where feasible and appropriate. Disaggregated data will identify disparities in access and ensure that native Hawaiian farmers and agricultural workers are equitably benefiting from any future programs.

And additionally, OHA respectfully requests we be invited to serve as a member of the working group. OHA has long advocated for policies that expand opportunities for native Hawaiian farmers, ranchers, and food producers. Through grant making loans and advocacy,

OHA has supported initiatives that increase access to land, water, and funds for Native Hawaiian agricultural practitioners. OHA has experience in housing policy, land use issues, and community based development, direct relationships with Native Hawaiian farmers,

and a statutory and constitutional mandate to advocate for the betterment of the conditions of Native Hawaiians. OHA's participation in the working group would ensure that agricultural workforce housing strategies are responsive to the needs of Native Hawaiian agricultural workers. Mahalo.

Okay. Thank you. Anybody else would like to testify on Zoom? Members questions? Chair?

Hunter? You know, who wants to be included?

Great. Good. That's all. Done. All right.

Okay I have a quick question, Hunter. Sorry I was waiting till you sat back down. You don't, On this working group. If we were to include, OHA, I do you feel like this would would serve small farmers as well as larger farm like, is it pretty broad and it's good?

I think that's the hope, certainly. I mean, our Farmers Union membership is a lot of smallholder and family farm operations. So we're certainly thinking about opportunities that will address not just workforce housing by capitalized well capitalized operations that can build that for themselves,

but also how state, county, and private lands and maybe the zoning and districting rules that govern those may need to be modified to allow for housing that can can support a diversity of farm sizes.

So in some of the other measures I think we put forward recommendations throughout caps on, you know, if it is a private development at a certain only a certain threshold, 50% of the housing can go to that one operation and it must be distributed benefits since it is on top of land.

Ideas like that, I think, are best probably debated in in a forum like this working group as opposed to one off as a, you know, day illusion bills come through in the marathon that is every session. Okay.

Thank you.

Any further questions? Okay. Next up, we have SB2350 SD2 relating to agriculture, transfers of rights, powers, functions, and duties of the aquaculture and livestock support services branch of the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity that relate to agricultural enterprises to the

agribusiness development corporations. Wow. Word salad requires that the regulatory functions of aquaculture and livestock support services branch remain within the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity as a defective defective date.

And we had three in support, three in opposition, and one with comments. First up, we have Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity in in person in opposition.

DAB stands on it's written testimony in opposition. Available for any questions.

Thank you. Brian Nielsen, Department of Land and Natural Resources in support in person.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee. Charlie Taylor on behalf of Brian Nielsen for division of applied resources. We stand in support of this bill and, are available for any questions.

Thank you. Agribusiness Development Corporation with comments in person. Dustin.

Yes. We stand out our written testimony with comments.

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto from Hawaii Farm Bureau in opposition. In person?

Not present. Hawaii Farm Bureau's written testimony respectfully opposed to this measure.

Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to testify on this measure on Zoom? Members, questions?

Chair. Mister Miyamoto, maybe you can, like, just explain more broadly to the public the basis of your opposition.

Thank you, representative. Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. We're not in favor of dismantling our Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. We understand that a lot of changes have been made.

The original bill was, proposing to, transfer the agriculture livestock support services branch and agriculture development division branch from DAB over to ADC that has been amended. Now it's just appears to be the development arm or the down portion of the aquaculture program

within the department of agriculture biosecurity and retain the regulatory portion. And that's something that many of us have advocated for, in both the senate and the house version of the bill. Again, a much better bill in our opinion than what was originally proposed,

but we still would like to retain all of those functions together. And we think they're more appropriate to be in DAB than DBEDT or ADC. We we understand the regulatory side. I don't think anybody disagreed that that should remain in DAB.

But, again, we do believe that we function better when all of the the components for any particular program, in this case, aquaculture, remain intact and together.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

And then finally, I'm sorry. It went backwards. If we are adding, to the workforce, working group, maybe we should add the county final departments also. Sorry. Just as a yes.

So. I know that's not appropriate, but I figured I'd do my final here. I didn't get any stage down today.

Is there anything else you'd like to add?

Thank you.

Appreciate it. Thank you. Great question. We're all family here.

Safe space. Chair, anybody any other questions? Seeing none, we're gonna move on to SB2169 SD1. This is relating to the Agribusiness Development Corporation, authorizes ADC to acquire by condemnation any real property or interest in real property under certain conditions prohibits any real property

acquired by the corporation by condemnation from subsequently being transferred or taken by any other public use without the corporation's consent as a defective effective date. 2169. We have 3 in support, 0 in opposition, 2 with comments. First off, Lauren Yasaka, DLNR with comments in person.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee. Lauren Yasaka, acting assistant administrator for the land division. We just really would like you guys to consider our amendment to the bill, which exempts basically the public lands as defined in January 20, 2012.

We support the intent of the bill, but we just need, we just wanna protect, right, everybody else's interest in the state plan. Thank you.

Understood. Thank you. Next up, we have department of, Agribusiness Development Corporation, sorry, in support in person. Can you Yes.

Thank you. Office of Hawaiian Affairs in support in person.

We have comments.

For this bill. OHA, Office of Hawaiian Affairs. We stand on our written testimony providing comments on SB 2169. OHA supports DLNR's requested amendment to exempt the public trust lands from the proposed condemnation powers.

Okay.

Both OHA and the state of Hawaii have a fiduciary duty to ensure that the public trust lands and revenues derived from them are protected and used in a manner consistent with trust purposes, one of which being the betterment of need of buying conditions.

Any expansion of condemnation authority that includes the public land trust lands raises serious concerns about potential impacts to the trust corpus, beneficiary rights, and the state's trust obligations. Mahalo.

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto from Hawaii Farm Bureau in support in person.

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

Thank you. Hunter Heaivilin, Hawaii Farmers Union with comments in person.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, Committee Members. Hunter Heaivilin on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. We submitted written testimony offering comments. This is an extraordinary power that would be afforded to a appointed board, and staff.

And we believe that if this power is to be provided, it should vest, the protection of these lands through the re mandatory requirement of these lands being put into agricultural conservation easements as opposed to solely under the veto power of the corporation and its board.

and it's requested by DLNR to support the the commentary of OHA as well. And fortunately, we have an existing statute around agricultural conservation easements that I think is a far more robust mechanism for the permanent protection of these lands instead of just adding

If the purpose of having condemnation power is to preserve and expand the agricultural land holdings within the state of Hawaii, we should be preserving those lands, not the power of the entity who oversees. So our testimony, is written also adds the public lands exceptions,

considerably to the power of this individual state corporation. Happy to answer any questions. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. That is everybody we have listed to testify. Would anybody else like to testify on Zoom? Members' questions? Chair?

I have a question.

That's okay.

Oh, I'm sorry.

You raised your hands wildly.

It's, actually for AD actually for OHA. So my question to you is whether or not you folks were consulted because, I know that so many lands currently under the purview of ADC are, you know, ceded lands.

So if was there a conversation prior to this legislation being introduced or To my understanding, no. Okay. Thank you. Mhmm. And then I do have a question for ADC.

Mark Takimoto for ADC.

Thanks for being here. Yeah. So I just have a question. When we spoke to Director Gady, previously, she said that she had no specific intent with respect to this, approach or this measure. And I was wondering, what then would be the purpose or what's the what is the purpose of this?

How does this support the mission of ADC?

Well, what it is is it's condemnation powers of specific for specific purposes. Right?

Infrastructure that supports agriculture. So water systems is a is let's just as a good as a good example, many of the turn of the century plantation water systems now as the plantations have broken apart, run across numerous private property, but maintaining that those connections is critical.

So the intention is to be able to if we cannot create some other mechanism, let's say, as a conservation easement or that, you know, you would not you would want to make sure that this this infrastructure was maintained and hold.

So you would go in and you you know, obviously, condemnation is not your first choice.

Right.

But it needs to be, you know, you wanna make sure that you don't lose control of a of a ditch or of a a connection that that provides access to farming.

Well, aren't these things normally handled through easements? Like, precisely as you mentioned.

That that's right. That would be the So

I'm asking, like, why you would need this additional, like, superpower?

I I think what it would be is, you know, that becomes sort of your worst case scenario. What ends up happening is as I've worked you know, I've worked in agriculture for a number of years, through different private companies and have been firsthand had situations where we could no longer access plantation, infrastructure or.

Where you had easements?

Yes.

So then what about the enforcement?

What happens is, you know, you'll have a situation where you'll need to go in there to repair or maintain something. And now you and you can't you no longer can get into or they it becomes very difficult for you to go in to make those repairs. Also, you'd wanna make sure that you can inspect

and ensure that the infrastructure is being properly accessed or used. Right?

Our we're not here to only provide, let's say, irrigation to only ADC property. It's we're here to provide irrigation if we can to any farming operation. And so we provide irrigation to farm operations that are not on ADC property and to other state agencies in DHHL, DLNR. Right? No.

I appreciate that. I understand. I'm just wondering, like, the need for the superpower. So that I thank you for your answer. Yeah.

Thank you, Chair.

Any other questions? Chair?

Okay. Seeing none, we're gonna move on to SB 3320 SD1, final measure of the day. It's related to the Food and Product Innovation Network, requires the Food and Product Innovation Network to integrate a coordinated food safety and regulatory framework,

requires the Agribusiness Development Corporation to establish key performance indicators for the food and product innovation network, develop a market access strategy, align and harmonize state branding initiatives, and report certain data to the legislature, Requires the Department of Business,

Economic Development and Tourism to evaluate and adapt adapt enterprise zone initiatives in all counties to better support the food and project product innovation network. It has a defective effective date. We have bye.

11 in support, 0 in opposition, and one comment. First up is Hawaii Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity.

DAB stands on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. Bart from Agribusiness Development Corporation in support in person.

Yes. We stand on our written testimony in support.

Thank you. Brian Miyamoto from Hawaii Farm Bureau in support in person.

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

Thank you. Hunter Heaivilin from Hawaii Farmers Union in support in person.

Farmers Union will briefly summarize its comments. Hunter Heaivilin on behalf of Hawaii Farmers Union. We're in support of this measure, but would like to add as we have asked for in all the previous hearings, an addition of a metric of measurement that focuses on the

growth and revenue and market access for smallholder family farm operations. We think it is very important to understand who the beneficiary are, very who the beneficiaries ultimately are of this form of state investment programming.

We've seen a lot of bills over the course of this session that I my perspective will slant the production capacity through the form of land subsidy, the processing capacity, and even some of the purchasing approaches that the state is pursuing towards larger scale operations,

which is not representative of the majority of farm operations we have in the state. So we think it's important for this measure to include metrics that start to assess what is the equity and the distribution of benefits that come from this up from this type of proposal.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. That's all the people we have listed. Is there anybody else who would like to testify on Zoom? Seeing none, that is it for today.

Okay. Bye bye.

Do we have oh, you're gonna go? Okay. Do we have any questions? Oh. Chair, any questions?

Okay. Gonna take a quick recess. Take a quick recess.

Good morning, everyone. Thanks for being here. We're gonna reconvene our committee on agriculture food systems committee for decision making. Brenda, let's start with the first bill on the agenda. Senate Bill 2885 SD1 relating to that security.

First, so for this bill, you know, it's it's a really good discussion, and I think CRB is an important issue. But I do have concerns with this bill just because of existing regulations and how it doesn't jive and also with the variations between the counties. So at this time, I'd like to defer this one.

Next up, we have Senate bill 2174 relating to agriculture. Definition of the Chair is to pass out a House Draft 1. So we're gonna delete section one, and re defect the date to July 1, 2020 and to begin discussion.

And I wanna place in the committee report the concerns raised by the draft regarding section one and the potential conflicts with Chapter 92. I do wanna keep this few minutes. That's why I'm just keeping it completely locked. So is that any questions, comments, or concerns members?

Seeing none. Let's check for the vote.

We are amended? Yes.

Thank you, Chair. Voting on SB 2174 SD 2. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is adopted. Alright.

Thank you, Members. Next on the agenda, we have Senate Bill 2925 SD1 relating to coconut trees. So the recommendation on this one probably the the most important piece that's gonna help folks is the tax credits. So what I'm for this one, we're gonna pass out house draft one. We're gonna move section one of the bill and keep the tax credit in place.

We'll take both taxes of recommended amendments and further defective date to July 1, 3000. Any questions? Seeing none.

Can we do a quick recess? I don't have any yet. Cash sheets. Currently sheets. Or we could just pause.

go. Two nine

There we

with amendments. Thank you. Voting on SB2925 SD. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and vice chair voting aye.

Is there any nays or with reservations? Seeing none, chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next, we have Senate Bill 2798 SD one relating to law enforcement. Recognition is to pass out of house draft one. We'll be making technical amendments for clarity, consistency, and style and further defecting the date to 07/01/2000. Any questions, comments, or concerns?

Seeing none. Yes, chair.

Thank you, chair. Voting on sb 2798 s t one. Chair and vice chair voting aye. Are there any reservations or nays? Seeing none, chair recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Moving on to Senate Bill 2320 SD one relating to time inspection. This one we're going to pass out of house draft one and just redefining the date to July 1 through the house. Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none.

Are you sure? Alright. Thank you, chair. Voting on SB 2,320 SD one. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments.

Chair and vice chair voting aye. Are there any reservations or nay? Seeing none, chair recommendation is adopted.

Great. Thank you. Next, we have Senate Bill 2,800 SD one relating to irrigation systems. Again, we're gonna pass out of house draft one and just redefec the date to 07/01/2000. Any questions, comments, or concerns?

Seeing none, vice chair.

Thank you, chair. Voting on SB 2800ST 1. Chair and vice chair voting I'm sorry. Recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and vice chair voting aye.

Is there any reservations or nays? Seeing none, chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next, we have SB 1230 SD two relating to meat donation. So So members for this measure, the introducer and also the introducer of the house companion are working with DOH and just want some more time to see if they can come up with a workable solution. So I'd like to keep this moving for now since the future will be for Bill. So I'd like to pass on a house draft on and just redefec the date to 07/01/3000.

Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none.

Thank you, chair. Voting on sp 1230 s t two. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair, vice chair voting aye. Is there any reservations or no's?

Seeing none, chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next, we have Senate bill 2706 SD one relating to workforce development. Recommendation of the chairs to pass out house draft one. So I wanna include a blank appropriation amount as per by dad in the testimony and place that recommended amount in your committee report and also change the effective date to 07/01/3000 and any technical amendments. Any questions, comments, or concerns?

Seeing none. Vice chair.

Thank you, chair. Voting on sb 2706 s d one. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair, vice chair voting aye. Are there any reservations or nays?

Seeing none, chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next, we have Senate bill 3233 s d one relating to agricultural workforce housing. Recommendation, we're gonna we're gonna pass out a house draft one. We're gonna take the suggested amendments by DAB to clarify the application to agriculture policy. And you defect the date to 07/01/2000.

Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none.

Thank you, chair. Voting on SB 3233 SD one. Chair's recommendation is passed with amendments. Chair and vice chair voting aye. Is there any reservations or nays?

Seeing none, chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next, we have Senate Bill 2405 s b one, which includes agricultural workforce housing. Recommendation is to pass out of house draft one. So you're gonna clarify on page two, line 16 to 17 to make DAB's assistance permissive instead of requested. Technical amendments for clarity, consistency, and style.

We're also gonna add the office line of affairs. And we defect the date to 07/01/3000. Any questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none, vice chair.

Thank you, chair. Voting on SB 2405 SD one. Chair's recommendation is passed with amendments, chair and vice chair voting aye. Is there any reservations or nays? Seeing none, chair your recommendation is adopted.

Alright. Thank you, members. For the next measure, and I appreciate what the Senate did to this bill to make it a little better, but I still think there's a lot of work that needs to be done. So I'm gonna defer this measure this time. Next up, we have Senate Bill 2169 s d one relating to the Agribusiness Development Corporation.

Our recommendation is to pass on the house draft one. You're gonna take DLNR's suggested amendment and exclude certain public lands and re defect the date to 07/01/2000. Questions, comments, or concerns? Reservation's for for so many others. Vice chair for the vote.

Thank you, chair. Voting on SB 2,169 SD one. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and vice chair voting aye and noting the reservation with representative Peruso. Are there any other reservations or nays?

Seeing seeing none, chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Alright. Thank you. On our last measure, Senate bill 3320 SD one. We're going to pass out a House draft one. We're gonna take we're gonna clarify the new section 163 d e on page five by inserting the amendments made in the House companion, House bill 2459.

We're also gonna include the appropriations section, section three of House Bill 2459. And we'll take the eighth Farmers Union amendment for the small farmers and also re defect the date to 07/01/2000 in any technical movements. Any questions, comments or concerns? Seeing none, Mr.

Thank you, chair. Voting on SB 3320 s t one. Chairs. Recommendation is passed with amendments. Chair and vice chair.

I Are there any reservations or nays? Seeing none chair your recommendation and doctor.

Thank you. Everybody rejoined.