Senate Standing Committee on Education

Good afternoon. This hearing of the Senate Committee on Education come to order. Today is Friday. It's raining. We all wanna get out of here, so hopefully, we'll be efficient.

It's March 20th, and this is in Room 229. Your—this hearing is being streamed live on YouTube, and if we must end this hearing due to technical issues, the committee will reconvene on Monday, March 23rd, in this Conference Room 229, and a public notice will be posted on the Hawaii State Legislature's website. And due to the number of measures we have and issues, you are limited to testify to one minute per testifier. And if the members have questions, we will call you back up.

So, with that, we will start with our first bill on the agenda, House Bill 1559, House Draft 2. Prohibits a student from using a telecommunication device on school grounds during the instructional day with certain exceptions, requires a confiscated telecommunication device to be released only to the student's parents or a legal guardian, who has three months to retrieve the device before it is subject to forfeiture. And nobody wants their devices to be forfeited. So, with that first up, Keith Hayashi for Department of Education.

Good afternoon, Chair Kim, Senator DeCorte. I'm Heidi Armstrong, Department of Education. The department stands on its written testimony providing comments on this bill. I would also like to emphasize that on 02/12/2026, the Board of Education did adopt a new statewide policy, defining cell phone use within our schools. We're available for any questions.

Do you just wanna say it so that people at home know what you're talking about?

Sure. So, the Board of Education policy has two prongs. For elementary and middle schools, cell phones are prohibited during school hours. Okay? So, that's from bell to bell.

Start bell, starting bell, ending bell. For high school, cell phones are prohibited during instructional time, but students do have the opportunity to use their phones during non-instructional time, such as before school, after school, during lunch, and recess. And for the details of that, defining that, the Department is in the process of writing implementation guidelines that will support that policy.

And the policy takes effect this next school year.

Yes.

And what is different about what you've—what policy is and what's in the bill?

I think the bill gives additional restrictions about when the phone is confiscated, how phones are stored, and the current—our policy that was adopted on February 12th is not that prescriptive. We support that. I'll give an example. Currently, schools who have their own cell phone policies have different ways of storing the phones that are working for them. One middle school uses the pouches that lock.

Another high school has, like, the shoe bags that hang on the back of a door. They're in the classroom. Kids put the phone in there when they enter the classroom. And then, another high school I just visited has the students keep their phones on them. There's announcement at the beginning of every class, don't take your cell phones out.

I did visit the classes and that wasn't an issue for the school. So, the flexibility of the schools is working for them.

Okay. I have a couple more questions. I will ask you to come back.

Okay. Thank you.

Hawaii State Board of Education. Nobody here from BOE?

Aloha, Chair. Sarah Milianta-Laffin, on behalf of HSTA. We appreciate the intent in this, in this bill because I will tell you one thing teachers are tired of being is the phone police. So, the liability piece in here makes us feel more comfortable. Taking phones away is, is tough.

You can spend the whole class period trying to figure out—it's like whack a mole where they get one out and you put one away and back and forth. And I do think there's a lot of methods to handle phones. What concerns me is, okay, so if I take a phone from a kid and I put it on my desk and I go back to teaching because that's my job, if I'm not watching that and that device disappears, then what happens?

Is it my fault the device is lost? I think teachers have been really nervous about who's gonna manage the phone pouches or even if you're saying, okay, put them in a calculator organizer on a door. If that's not locked and secured, that liability issue really makes teachers uncomfortable. So, we appreciate that part of that, and we're available for questions.

Okay. Thank you. Lisa Bender, comments. We have Mia Nishiguchi, opposed, on Zoom.

Not present on Zoom, chair.

Not present on Zoom. We have several others. One other in support and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 in opposition.

Is there anyone here wishing to testify on this measure?

Aloha, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kidani, and members of the Senate Education Board. My name is Nina Lopresti. I'm a junior at Milani High School. You have my written testimony, but I'm here in opposition of bill HB 1559. Firstly, I wholeheartedly agree that my generation lacks a gen—a regular attention span and that phones may be—can be—a major issue in distracting a student during instructional periods. Personal devices, however, have already been restricted in many schools. This bill is unnecessary, redundant, and could harm student education.

This bill puts students who use their devices in an effective and studious way at an unfair disadvantage. More—moreover, all high schools use social media accounts to engage their students in activities, deadlines, and schedule changes. Taking away these crucial social and communication tools is unreasonable, particularly when the school itself encourages their use. Doesn't the UE already have a ban on cell phone use? Yes, they do.

So, what is—what need is there to suddenly have a complete ban on personal devices throughout the entire school day? So, not only is this bill redundant, but it limits our freedoms during our personal break time.

I agree with you. Yeah.

Am I allowed to...?

What was your name again?

Nina Lopresti.

Nina Lopresti. Okay. And I don't know that we have your testimony, so perhaps you can share it with us after.

Yeah. I emailed it to you guys.

Okay. But yeah. Okay. Well, thank you. Good job.

Good job, dad. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing none. We are open for questions. I'd like you, Heidi, if you can come back. So, as you pointed out, there are some things in the bill that is not being covered by the policy.

Is that something that you folks will look at as you do your rules?

There are, we, we have to craft the implementation guidelines, but we do foresee those guidelines will allow flexibility among the schools to suit their specific circumstance.

Okay. So, you folks are allowing each school to, to decide how, how they're gonna handle this, or are you gonna have some general guide—general guidance—across the board so that there's no issue on, you know, one school's not doing as enough as other schools are?

Elementary is pretty straightforward. It's the secondary we would probably see more variation. But what will be consistent among all of the schools is that cell phones will not be used during instructional time, and, and it could be unless it is part of an instructional activity.

Okay. And how do we safeguard these devices from not disappearing somewhere after they've been taken?

And that in, what we're thinking at this point, that would be at the discretion of the school, how they would store the phones. I'll give an example why a one-shot method, it would be difficult. So, some of the schools that use the pouches, they have one ingress and egress or two to the schools. So, it's very easy for them to see the students as they walk in, and then the pouches are distributed.

And when they leave other schools, there's multiple access points, so methods such as that would not work for them.

Okay. Well, and I don't know what if I'm alone in this, but I would hope that the DOE would have maybe several options, but not just everybody just do whatever they want at each school. So, there need to be certain things, like, you know, in safeguarding, you can safeguard it in, in, you know, three different ways or whatever. They have no choice.

But I think there needs to be some kind of systematic options that parents can understand, you know, if each of the schools choose, instead of something off the wall, like, you know, putting them in a shoebox and putting it away underneath the desk or something.

You know?

Understood. And that will be a point of consideration when we craft the implementation guidelines.

And when do you expect that guidelines to be done and ready for public?

May. May 2026.

Okay. So, in, in a month and 1—2 months.

Yes.

Okay. Members, any other questions?

Senator DeCorte.

Question. Thank you. I think in reading the testimony, there was a lot of concerns and comments based on, like, the three-month forfeiture that seemed kind of excessive. Do you see that to be a part of the solution that might keep these kids accountable?

No. No. I, we're, we—at this time, we weren't planning on putting that into our implementation guidelines.

Okay. Do you think that there is an appropriate forfeiture time period that would fit, or??

I'll, I'll, I'll give an example of what's widely used on the mainland, and we've done a lot of research on this from school systems who already have these policies in place statewide. And a common example would be the first time the teacher just says put the phone away. And if that's a done deal, it's, it's over, it's done, everybody moves on. Teachers also, we've heard, don't want to be the phone police.

So, if that doesn't happen, then many schools have administrative support where the teacher just informs the administrator, and then an administrator comes and addresses the issue.

Okay. What are some of the consequences if they don't follow the rules?

A common one is the administrator take the—takes the phone. It is then in the office. The student can come get the phone at the end of the day. The second infraction that, that happens for the student, and this is just in general, and this isn't what I'm saying is necessarily gonna be in our guidelines, but we're learning from it, is the administrator then takes the phone, and the parent has to come and pick up the phone.

And then, there's a conference with the parent and the student explaining the rationale of this.

Okay. And then, that's at the principal's discretion, not the complex area superintendent, the district area?

This is all within the school. Within school personnel. Yes.

So, when you say administrator, you're referring to?

Principal or vice principal.

Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

Okay. So, hopefully something will be in there so there's at least a little bit of teeth in it that's reasonable.

Yes. We do want—we do want teeth, and we also don't want the teachers to have to bear the burden of being phone police. It's very distracting.

Any other questions? No? Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other for anybody else? No? Okay. Let's go on.

We are on House Bill 2012 House Draft 1. Establishes and appropriate funds for the Department of Education to establish and implement a two year Community Literacy Labs Pilot Program. : Keith Hayashi for the Department of Education.

Aloha, Chair Kim, Senator Decorte and Senator Hashimoto. Teri Ushijima from the Department of Education. We stand on our written testimony and we are available for any questions you may have.

Okay. So I need you to explain what they're standing on their public understands and the people here. We don't have this information or something.

Sure. The department supports the intent of this bill, and this bill provides high need communities with after school literacy supports. If this measure, does move forward. Our recommendation is to scale the pilot from five sites to two sites and extending the timeline to three years to ensure the program is strategically planned, properly staffed and integrated into existing school based literacy frameworks.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Stacey Aldrich for the Public Library System.

Aloha, Chair and members of the committee. Stacey Aldrich from State Public Library System [inaudible]...

Okay. Thank you. Testifying for Teach of America, Piikea Kalakau-Baarde, not here.

In support. Meilan Akaka Manfre for Teach America as well, also in support. Not here. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure?

Hearing none. Members, we are open to questions.

Yes. Teri, can come back.

And Chair, I know this is not your your folks' bill. However being that you are is what the intent of this measure. What why exactly what aren't you folks doing that this is needed or explain to us why why we need this measure or why we should implement this kind of program.

Well, we think that literacy opportunities in general can be helpful in different ways and community partners. Our schools do already offer tutoring, and especially in our title one schools.

Out of a 172 schools, the element 63% of those elementary schools and 33% of the secondary schools do offer some type of, tutoring support already. And our department, we also have available 24/7 tutoring that schools can opt into. So we do have things in place already.

So as we support the intent, it's because we know, you know, it never hurts to have more literacy opportunities for students. As for what the department is already doing, we are addressing these opportunities for students.

You know, I think we can all agree that you can never have enough of anything.

Yes.

But there's a limit because we only have so much money.

We agree.

And if we keep implementing everybody's idea, and it's piecemeal and I'm wondering, you know, if you see a lot of the bills that have come forth is that we implemented everything. I don't know that we have any money left to even pay our teachers to do the job.

Yes.

So, these are things that I hope that the DOE would really look at and to see, is there a problem? and is this going to solve the problems?

We don't see a problem, And this is, like you said, it's not our bill. We, you know, we are willing to work with partners if necessary. But if this would require us to put efforts or resources towards this, which is, you know would then that's why part of our testimonies, like, if it were to go through, which we're not, it's not our bill, then we think the scale is too large to begin with based on some of our past experiences.

You trying to be so nice to everybody that at some point DOE has to put their foot down to say, you know what? This is great, but, you know, where's the money gonna come from? So do you know how much this program is gonna cost?

No.

So we don't have a number. It's blank over here. So yeah. Let's introduce a blank. So that's another difficulty because of how do we sustain this?

You know, once you do a program, then people feel entitled and then it's very difficult to undo it.

We agree. It would be difficult.

Here's another question. So what other literacy options is DOE exploring? Because we do know that there are districts and schools where students are graduating and they're not graduating with a 12th grade reading ability. So

I think

What other options do we being proactive about? Because you're gonna constantly see these measures come out because there's that sense that it's not adequate. Right?

So I think, that's a large part of our comprehensive literacy reading grant that we received for 60,000,000 over 5 years. And so, we are looking in terms of the instruction that happens to be in line with the science of reading. And, and as part of that plan, the schools do reach out to their families, and they're also looking into coaching that they provide for teachers, because, really, what happens in the classroom impacts their learning.

But in addition to that, and also to support literacy, they're able to use some funds for resources. For example, for our CLSD 1 program, we had schools engage with families for family nights.

They gave out books that they could add to their family libraries. We had different opportunities for engagement. So and one thing we always do is our summer, our summer fun reading book. I don't know. You were able to see that.

But we have many schools who provide that for their students, and they have like, stickers in the back. And what's really neat about it is it's in both English and Olelo. So it's like a dual language summer reading like, booklet that the students can engage with. So those are some examples.

I know the library does a good job with their summer reading program as well. So

Yes. We agree.

Appreciate it. I know we took part in that when my son was little.

So $60,000,000 grant, when did that start?

We're in the second year, I believe.

And do you have a list of what where the funds have gone and where they're going?

I well, yes. We do.

Okay. You can provide the committee with that information. You know, as you know, then you folks spoke opposing the student book authorship that I have the bill. I mean, these are additional things that are low cost that can help as far as literacy and having a student project that not only is literacy, but encompasses all the other types of learning that go on in the school. In addition, allow the students to be able to share their story, to be proud.

I know if you attended, and I know superintendent attended the Kapalama.

I was there.

Were there too.

I was there. It was terrific.

Right. And they had those 12 kids standing up there, and they were so proud, and their parents were so proud. Now multiply that by every fifth grader in the state, having that same feeling. And and that's what we're hoping that in addition to these types of projects that you folks have, that we do the simple things that can be incorporated into the curriculum that really don't cost lot. Right?

We do know of many teachers who already do that, in their classrooms.

Yes. And I'm just bringing bringing you folks examples of stuff that have been pouring in. Obviously, this is the book. But, you know, this has been Kayevai that has been doing this. And then it got stopped with the new principal that came in. It got stopped.

They don't do it anymore. And it's not an individual book, but it's each student. But these are some projects that are going on. I got one from Nanakuli, and they did it with just paper and a bind, binding.

As a teacher, former teacher, my students published a lot of their own books, you know, with the Hawaii writing project and the writing process and to promote literacy. And, so I think, you know, that's still highly encouraged for students to do.

So, that's why when me, when you folks came out in opposition and said, well, the cost and the time. Your schools are doing it. They're not doing it consistently, and they're doing it more as a group, but this whole thing. So I would hope that you folks would be looking at that to have comments and not necessarily oppose like you did in that measure.

But let me ask you this other question. Have you folks looked at other types of literacy, options like, virtual coaching? literacy coaching?

Not specifically virtual coaching. Our coaches usually go into the classroom, and they interact with, you know, the teacher, observe the students. We do have some technology, where, and this might not be specifically to literacy but coaching in general and mentoring.

They have some technology devices that, kinda can record the teacher as they do instruction and as they help and assist students. And that kind of like follows you around.

I think some teachers have used it when they applied for the national board certification, but that's a possible tool that could be used for virtual coaching if someone else were to view that. But we in particular, that's not been one of the things we've been doing.

Well, I recently was invited to the President's Office with an individual local person who's on the Mainland and is involved in this, and they actually have this this virtual, virtual coaching, I guess, for lack of word app that they use that have had tremendous results and they're I guess they're they're piloting in Kauai as well as a Kamehameha school, and my understanding is that they have a federal grant of $4,000,000 over 4 years, and they've been trying to get DOE to even look at it and apply for the grant, and they have they're having difficulty.

So these are the kinds of things, and I know I just found out today, talking to the president, that some stuff is moving, but it takes us so long to look at what are these options, and it's $20 a child per year, per year which and that grant could cover 50,000 students.

So these are the kinds of options that we're looking at that I hope DOE is looking at as far as math, as far as literacy, because you know, it's great to have live coaches, but we cannot provide enough live coaches for every student, and especially the ones that really need it and at the cost.

So instead of piecemealing and putting giving you three people, three coaches for the entire state, we need to be looking at what are some of the resources out there, and what are the grants that can help us to pay for this?

Yes. And regarding that what you're talking about, and the innovation grant that is available, we we are on that.

Finally.

And well, it didn't come out that long ago.

When we met.

But any but, anyway, the Rep is also doing some or we're asking her to do some demonstrations. And, like with other projects, start possibly starting a pilot. We did look to see if some of these, AI based tools could also serve as a dyslexia sensitive screener because we would we wouldn't want all of these individuals. So those are all of the considerations, and and we're on that.

Okay. Because when we met, they were concerned because the deadline was booming, and they had been in conversations and that it never got up to the top level of of DOE. And so that's why they we were in that meeting. And at that meeting, we actually called in the Board of Education Rep who happened to be around, and he didn't know anything about it. And so he got on it.

And so because of that, now you guys are finally on it. But that's the kind of concern that we have. And there was another one, like I said, they talked about that Hawaii never even applied for, and that was too bad. So these are, these are opportunities out there that we need DOE to be aware and take advantage of.

Absolutely. And then, like, for the CLSD grant, we did take advantage and got a lot of money. So we do see the value of of taking advantage of those opportunities.

That will be here next year, and you guys can can elaborate on pilots that we might be doing in this area and that, hopefully, we can even do that in the math, area of math. Yeah. Because I know we have a bill for math coaches, but I wanna see a more comprehensive plan and not piecemeal physicians. And, you know, three math coaches is not going to going to solve what we need.

Not at all.

Yeah. Right. Thank you. Members, do you have any questions?

Yes. Please. Thank you. So it sounds like according to your testimony, you folks are in support with comments, but basically in support.

For the literacy labs?

Yeah.

Not really. Oh, no. Not really.

Just for the, Yeah.

We support that we support the intent. And if we are required to do it, if the bill does move forward, then we request that the scaling go down because it will require us to take attention away from other things to figure out how to do this.

Stronger on some of these.

Oh. So, yes, we prefer not to do this.

Well, you were not that nice on on the, on the book authorship book. So you could do that across the board on average as well.

Yeah. What I think that this bill might be signaling is that there's a greater need for this kind of education in the department, in the schools. So although this might need some tweaking and we might need to, you know, maybe lessen some of the appropriations, what I think it's signaling is that the schools are not doing enough during the school time. So then we have to create other programs after or maybe during the off time or things like that.

So I feel like that's what it's signaling.

Now that might not be the impression that you folks are getting, but I think the department should be more front thinking with their, fiscally front thinking to see how we can save more money. Because if this bill does go through and we do have to appropriate more money, that's just more money to the department, where I think it would save taxpayers more if we just kind of tighten up and maybe address some of these issues during the school period.

Thank you.

Oh, did you wanna respond?

Did you have a question?

Sure. So the question is, this bill to me is signaling that the department is not doing their job. That there is not enough strong literacy or programs that they feel are fitting the needs of the students at the capacity that needs to be met.

So, this past, past year, two years ago well, this past year, we are implementing what we're calling our literacy levers, and we do have those in math as well. And those are our high yield strategies, the tier one instruction. It does include coaching, but for literacy, through the CLSD grant, we and this is coaching for staff, not for students.

High quality instructional materials, and then not only saying the science of reading, but what is the continued professional development and support that we can give the teachers to ensure that those science of reading strategies are implemented in those early grades so that we can keep from the beginning, get students the basic literacy skills they need to progress.

So we do have robust literacy levers that we are implementing statewide, and we do anticipate that they will have a positive effect on student growth and proficiency.

Okay. Well, that's not what I'm getting out of the introduction of this bill. This bill to me is saying that you folks are not doing enough, and there's more that needs to be done. Okay. So, yes.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

And hopefully, we'll look into some of the other types of resources that we talked about.

Correct. Yes.

Thank you.

Oh, also, I apologize. If I can just share one note, actually, speaking of tutoring. There's a program that Lehioku Elementary is doing. It's called Ignite, Ignite Tutoring. And right now, there's 30 students that are participating and 90% of the students have hit their 70% target.

That is costing $30,000 a year, and they have full participation. It is a virtual process. So, again, it's efficient. It's cost savings. It seems to be working very well in my community.

So if we can think of more of those kind of fiscally responsible programs, I think that there would be a lot more support.

Thank you.

And, Senator, that's exactly what that one literacy program and with a grant of $4,000,000 actually coming with it. So, yeah, that would be excellent. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Next question. Next, next bill, House Bill 2297. Updates Hawaii's statutory framework for adult and community education programs to ensure alignment with federal funding requirements and current best practices in those principles. First testifier again, DOE, Keith Hayashi.

Aloha, Chair Kim, Senator Hashimoto, Senator DeCorte. Keith Hayashi, superintendent, Department of Education. Department stands on its written testimony in support of this measure. Hawaii State Department of Education strongly supports HB 2297, HD 1, which updates the scope and department's adult education programs to align with the federal Adult Education and Family Literacy Act or AEFLA.

Title two of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act. The amendments to section 302A, 443 Hawaii Revised Statutes not only aligns with federal AEFLA grant requirements, but also aligns the department's priority to enable all students to be globally competitive and locally committed. There is greater emphasis on workforce readiness and workforce development, providing under-skilled individuals with educational activities to develop the skills necessary to be gainfully employed.

The amendments that we're offering also align the basic and secondary education programs with the department's K 12 programs and provide for family and community literacy. That includes financial literacy and health and wellness instruction. Thus the education programs enable adult learners to develop the foundational skills necessary to be productive in home and in work life. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. We stand by for any questions.

Thank you. Lui Hokoana in support. Testifying for the university. Helen Sanpei? Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Questions. Helen, can you come? I know we've talked about similar things before. How many, how many adults go through the program yearly?

About 6,000 if you count not only the NRS students that are required when we report to the federal government, we but we offer other classes such as workplace literacy and...

Are we, are we able to accommodate all that sign up or register?

Yes. We are. We have 10 campus, well, both schools together have over 10 campuses throughout the state.

So that's McKinley and what? Does Farrington have one?

Right. Farrington comes under McKinley.

Oh, I see. They come under McKinley.

Yeah. McKinley has Farrington, Moanalua, Maui, Molokai. They're in there.

Yeah. Right. I know. Because a lot of people take advantage of that.

Especially the GED for Farrington. That's really a strong program.

Alright. So what changed at the federal level that requires this measure?

Oh, the language is outdated, and it doesn't include workforce or workplace literacy. So we, it's really important that we change the language to be in sync with what the federal government is requiring us to do.

And is there any cost to this?

No. No cost.

Okay. Well, thank you. We appreciate having no cost. Okay. Question? Helen. Hold on.

So, Helen, if we update these standards, are we gonna be able to access more federal funds, or what's the upside other than it's old?

I think what'll happen is they'll continue providing us with the necessary funds to continue our programs.

So that potentially is in jeopardy if we don't update it.

Exactly. Yeah.

But there's no more new funds that we could access?

I wish. Would be nice. Thank you.

Talk to your congressman. Okay. No other questions. We're moving on to House Bill 2122, House Draft 1. Establishes the teacher housing assistance program to provide housing vouchers to certain eligible teachers, appropriate funds out of the teacher's housing revolving fund. We have again Keith Hayashi from DOE. Sean.

Aloha, Chair Kim, Senator DeCorte, and Senator Hashimoto. Sean Bacon speaking on behalf of the Department of Education. We stand on our written testimony providing comments. And just to expand a little bit, the department really supports the intent, which aims to address our teacher recruitment and retention issues by establishing this teacher housing voucher. We recognize really the high cost of living here within the state of Hawaii, and this could be one of the barriers to help.

I think we do highlight in our testimony, though, that this would require some additional administrative resources, I think, to run this program, trying to determine eligibility to monitoring the... It would require them to work in a hard to staff location for up to five years and monitoring that. And any failure to do that would require a repayment. So there would be additional monitoring that would need to happen during this time, but we definitely support the intent and are available for any questions.

Okay. Thank you. Ed Noh, Charter Schools is not here. J.N. Musto? Joy Bulosan, comments. Osa Tui.

Aloha, Chair and Senators. Sarah Milianta-Laffin on behalf of HSTA. So I've been teaching public title one schools for 21 years. I have a degree and a bachelor's degree and a master's degree. I also got my certification through Teach for America because I believe in public service. I'm one of your state's few computer science teachers, and I make $55,000 a year.

And I say that to say for my rent Waianae, I stay right below the comp. I pay 3,000 a month for my rent, and I have two children under three. So that daycare is about another $3,000. So my teacher salary does not even pay housing and childcare. I mean, here's the thing. So it's not offered. I know. But I love what I do. And but I think about that. But, I mean, that happens.

I've had other people offer me to be like, hey, Mili. Here's a card. Just being in this building as a teacher lobbyist being like, I would pay you way much more to do other things. I love what I do, and I'm good at what I do, and I wanna keep doing it. And I'm mid career educator. So how do I coach these new teachers? I mean so I'm also the Leeward chapter president. So 3,000 teachers from Mākaha to Pearl City.

Like, I kind of help them within HSTA, and they're living five to a two bedroom as new teachers. They're taking Zoom meetings from their cars because they can't go ahead and have residency. And how do I encourage the next generation of teachers if they don't have housing? So please support.

Sherry Menor, Chamber? We have Luke Nohea Gee in support on Zoom. Hi, Luke.

Hi. Aloha, Senator Kim, Senator DeCorte, and Senator Hashimoto. My name is Luke Nohea Gee. I am a junior or eleventh grader at Kealakehe High School on the Big Island of Hawaii, and, I stand before you today in strong support of HB 2122. And the main reason why I'm here is because I like to talk to my teachers a lot. And when they tell me, like, oh, what is it like to be a teacher? I often hear about the struggles that they have to go through, especially living here in Hawaii in a place with such high cost of living.

And the number one thing that I hear is that housing is the biggest issue for them. For every single teacher that I have talked to about what makes teaching hard for them, they always tell me that they cannot afford to live here or they cannot afford to live on a teacher's salary and afford all the housing that has to do in our place. A lot of teachers that I know have to live with, have to live in multi, have to live with other roommates who are the teachers who live in studios.

And really, I think that we should be supporting our teachers because when we support our teachers, we support our students. And as students, I understand just how much teachers matter every single day and they don't they don't support us more than academically, but also personally. So I respectfully urge you to support HB 2122. Mahalo.

Luke, are you gonna be a teacher?

Not after he found out about the pay.

Yeah. No. That's... I want to. I want to, but I'm trying to, I'm trying to set myself up for later.

Okay. Well, we appreciate your testimony today. Well done. Thank you. Mia Nishiguchi is on Zoom.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

Thank you. Let's see. We have 2, 4, 6, 8, 9 others in support. Anyone else here wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing none. We are open for questions. Members, any questions? I have a couple of questions. Who should I ask this to? They're not here. J.N. Musto. Go ahead. Yes.

Jesse, maybe you can come up. I know this is not your bill, but hopefully you know this.

It's housing, I'd like to talk about.

So how much is in the Housing Revolving Fund right now? The Teacher Housing Revolving Fund. Is it substantial?

No. I just don't know the answer.

Because that's under you. Right? You administer that?

Yes. It is. Yeah. Okay. I don't have that information in front of me. I'm sorry.

Just anecdotally, though, you have, is there enough to support this kind of thing? Vouchers? Because I think that my concern is we you guys were coming in this year's budget for the fixing up of the cottages. Right?

That's right.

And you guys didn't have enough money in the revolving fund to pay for that. Right?

We needed money to help. Yeah.

But you guys were gonna tap into the fund first?

That's part of it.

Okay. Maybe you can get that to us.

I will. Thank you.

So why don't you stay there? What kind of what kind of inventory do you think the state has to be able to... Because, obviously, we're not gonna be able to build all the housing, teacher housing. So if if you give vouchers out for rent, rental assistance, are there enough supply out there for at what we can afford to pay for teachers that need housing in some of these areas?

I haven't done an analysis on this particular bill, but the vouchers can help with rentals. You know, there are other issues affecting the supply of rentals out in the market. Supply is an issue. SFA is here. They're working on housing, so that helps increase supply. The vouchers can help, though.

Okay. Well, again and, you know, this is a particular bill, but I would hope that DOE, looking at all everything, is like, you know, what are options for teachers? What are options for teacher housing? Is there enough inventory out there that even if we pass this and they've given them funding, but if they can't go anywhere to rent for that kind of funds, then where are we? Right? And if we have to build, then what's that? So I would hope that you guys are looking at all the aspects. There's enough of you folks in administration that you should have people in that are looking at all these things.

Yes. Part of a larger package, I think, what you're getting at the vouchers is one part. We have the Lahaina housing on Maui that's opened up and is taking applications and rentals. There's the housing that SFA is working on, Mililani. So there's projects that, you know, we're helping to coordinate. That's not our major mission at DOE to build housing, but there's some of it. We do rely on our partners to get housing out there.

Okay. Well, there's a lot of things that you folks are doing that's not your major mission, and you folks are doing it. So we keep accepting all of these added added things, and there's many bills which I'm not gonna hear because I don't necessarily think that it's the role of DOE should be doing it. But I think you guys gotta do a better job in letting us know what is your role, and you need to focus in on that role and do the best you can because now it's like you're master of everything. Right? We're jack of all trades and master of none. So.

I agree.

Thank you. SFA? Oh, okay. Go ahead.

So for the, for the Lahaina housing, is that under your shop, or is that under somebody else?

Well, that was started before me. But in our shop though. Yeah.

But the maintenance and the ongoing rentals, that's through you. So what is, so how is that working? Because is there no issues with collective bargaining on those? Or are you, are you using that as just similar to how you're using the teacher cottages? Because I know I don't know if you if you read through the testimony, collective bargaining, chief negotiator has concerns with this particular bill, but I don't know if how we're getting around that in with Lahaina housing.

Well, for housing projects, generally, my understanding, working on past projects is that there aren't, you know, there aren't union jobs involved in housing projects necessarily. For this particular project, the Lahaina housing, there is a there's a development and operation agreement for a period of time and then we'll need to figure out what we do after that period.

I mean, how, what? So are you giving this, I guess the question is is if you give it for free to a teacher that works for the DOE, that's probably a fringe benefit. Right?

Well, the for the Lahaina housing, it's not free. It's a... It's yeah. It's like affordable rent. Yeah.

Okay. So but you guys aren't considering that a fringe benefit then? It's just...

No. We're not treating it that way.

You're paying the full amount, but you got you just happen to have to be a teacher.

Right. It's developed to be affordable.

So is that is that the way that the DOE is trying to figure out that's the best way to move forward with other developments? Or...

In that particular project, it was to meet a particular need after the Lahaina wildfires. I'm not sure that's a programmatic thing we're gonna be doing moving forward, building housing, workforce housing.

You're gonna rely on SFA then.

That's their, in their wheelhouse.

Okay. Okay. Thank you, Chair.

Yeah. Thank you. In your testimony, you had shared that the passing of this measure would require additional staff, resources, process application, verify eligibility, administer program, that kind of stuff. Any idea how much you folks will need or how much something like that is gonna cost?

And I have to defer it to Sean on that.

Thank you for the question. I think it's something we're gonna really have to look at, but I think it may involve several areas of the department between the Office of Human Resources, where we're actually gonna be needing to evaluate the criteria, working with our payroll department to ensure that the vouchers go out on a monthly basis. And I have to evaluate on a monthly basis too to make sure that they continue to meet the criterion eligibility.

Also, it talks about that in the event that they didn't receive the voucher and then didn't meet the criteria, that there's a repayment process and we may have to be working with loan recovery experts too. So I think that there, it would require several additional staff or staff members to be able to run and operate this appropriately.

Yeah. Because the vouchers, it just seems to me like the incentive it's kinda like low hanging fruit, right, for the teachers, is to be able to have those vouchers to help subsidize their housing costs. And so...

Because it talks about that you could use it for rent or for a mortgage or other types of things. I think that we need, you know, we wanna make sure we wanna make sure it's not gonna impact the department's current budget. I mean, there is it's blanked out at this point right now how much money would actually be appropriated for this.

We'd have to then determine an appropriate voucher amount and work through that. But it would be an additional administrative burden on the department to run this program. But we but we support the intent because we're, you know, it helps to support her mission of recruitment and retention of our educators here in our schools.

Yeah. But supporting the intent is good, but then to backdoor that with now we need more money and more staff, like, that's the scary part is... And I understand that these things do take manpower. I understand that. But we've gotta find incentives for these teachers somewhere. And I don't know if tweaking your guys' budget or something, but we need to really come to the table to figure out how we're gonna incentivize the teachers to continue to be teachers. And for the ones that want to be teachers, but maybe they can't afford to be teachers, there has to be something a little bit more beneficial for them. So thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair.

Okay. So why aren't we looking at, why is the DOE looking at the bigger picture? And I think that's why we're in the situation we're in now. Because you know what? That's not supposed to be in your wheelhouse. You shouldn't even be saying, oh, we're gonna work on this. Yeah. We support this, but you know what? This belongs in the housing department. We're not there to determine what the subsidies are gonna be, who's gonna eligible.

That's what housing does. They do it for affordable, they do it for all of that. So DOE needs to start looking and saying, you know what? This, we support this as teacher housing, but the implementation of this program belongs in the housing department. So your testimony should be saying and you should be telling legislators that they need to put it in the proper place because why are we going to create a little mini housing group in DOE?

Again, there's just one more thing that you guys gotta do. Right? And that's not in your wheelhouse. So let's get with the program and say, you know what? Legislators, get it right. We got we got to put it in the right place because they have the personnel. They understand the market. They under, all of that. Right?

So you guys gotta focus in on some of this stuff, so that it's not keep accepting all of these things. Because it's so easy for legislators to wanna throw everything into DOE, and you folks are sitting there accepting it passively or passively saying, oh no. You know, we don't take it, but we'll take it if you give us more money. No. That shouldn't even be in your wheelhouse at this point.

Understood.

Thank you. SFA. Riki, can you come up?

Riki Fujitani, School Facilities Authority.

So Riki, do we have, do we have inventory to support a voucher system for teacher rentals or teacher housing?

So these remote areas has 55 units that are really should be torn down and rebuilt.

What should be torn down and rebuilt?

The cottages.

Oh, you're talking about the cottages?

Unfortunately, I used to run this. There are 55 units. Half of them should be torn down. The balance of the fund is about $300,000. That's all there is in there. So so, yeah, they're these are remote areas.

Yeah. So why are we in that, this situation?

I think it was, it was under public housing. It was taken over a long time ago by a superintendent who decided they should take that responsibility. And it's just this legacy since then. It really should belong somewhere else.

So, again, DOE taking on areas that they really shouldn't be taking on.

Yeah. This was, like, two superintendents ago that took it on, and it should be somewhere else.

But it seems like that's a, that's a pattern with DOE wanting to help, wanting to... You know, I'm not trying to be criticize in a sense that it's bad, but it really doesn't, at the end of the day, we're not helping the situation by trying to take it over and not being able to do a good job about it and not having the right personnel to do it.

There's no scale. So it's just one person, a revolving position that's not permanent, who just does that with the 55 cottages. It's a really difficult situation.

So as far as, besides the cottages, is there, in the marketplace, private marketplace? I mean, everybody's...

Yeah. These are remote areas where no developer would be interested in building. There's not many options. The best is someone with a house who has a room that's willing to lend it to a teacher.

Even if we gave them a voucher, they wouldn't...

It'd be hard. For the remote areas. Right.

And how many units in Mililani?

Well, there are 95 units planned, but we will line up with LIHTC public housing financing affordability like everybody else. Without a significant state site, then it is a challenging to build because affordable housing doesn't pencil out, which I've been told many times.

Questions? Okay. Maybe if we freed up some money, we could have it. Maybe if we get our...

Any amount would help to just push it along.

If we get Medicaid reimbursements, we could have some more money. Question? Wait. You done? Okay. Thank you. Anyone else?

Any other questions? If not okay.

House Bill 2345 House Draft 1, relating to school facilities. We should have kept this picture up here. Requires the school facilities authority to establish geographically based capital improvement project district for the localized management of deferred maintenance transfers of all deferred maintenance functions, funds, and vacant facility development branch positions from the Department of Education to the School Facilities Authority.

Keith Hayashi, DOE

Good afternoon, chair, senators. Jesse Souki, Deputy Superintendent of Operations for the Department of Education. We rise in opposition to this bill. We submitted testimony, and we'll rest on that. But just sort of a summary.

The department's deferred maintenance program is organized around geographically based school districts, supported by the facilities maintenance branch on Oahu and DAGS on the neighbor islands. We have district project coordinators that serve the school facing extensions of the department, providing on the ground coordination and responsiveness in the areas, where they are employed. Thank you.

Thank you. DOE? not here for comments. Stacey Aldrich?

No. I'm on the wrong tags. I'm 11 below. Sorry. I caught Stacey.

Keith Reagan. I'm gonna need to scare you guys.

Keith Reagan from DAGS.

Thank you. Riki Fujitani, School Facilities Authority. We offer comments that the right structure is decentralization and localization. The idea is one level of accountability to someone living in the district. Give them in the private sector, we call it P&L responsibility, profit and loss.

We give that same budgetary person to the person on Kauai, Maui, Big Island. They could make the decision right there whether to expend funds if something is broken. One level of accountability. Decentralization is the right model for the structure. Thank you.

Okay. Joy Bullasan for FLCIO, HGEA, not here. Kamaka Kaimuluwa, WPW, testifying for comments. Ted Meehan, in support. Anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 2345?

Hearing none. Team members, questions?

I do have some questions. Who shall I start with?

How about we start with DOE.

So, you know, we've been talking about CIP from DOE for a while now, and I don't see anything that DOE has really submitted to us to show us that you have a handle on all of this. So can you you know, I mean, I just read what you said to Civil Beat that, this bill really is a solution without a problem.

We're one of these CIP bills, and the department already has a software needed to track quality and funding of facilities, said Deputy Superintendent, Jessi Souki, and able to oversee its deferred maintenance projects to managers working on each island. And yet we are bombarded with these kinds of measures, bills, calls.

People are upset that things are not getting done. We have backlogs. I mean, you haven't even provided me with updated list that we can look at. So I don't know how you can make these statements when we're still in disarray.

So it's a big problem, and I think we we all know that.

But you said it's not a problem.

Well, this is a mix

Solution without a problem. Until you acknowledge it's a problem, I don't know that we kinda we have we can deal with it. And then you come and you don't give us all the numbers and stuff.

So that was, I think, from one of the hearings on a bill. I I can't recall which bill it was, but there are over 4,000 facilities. The facilities are old. What I was talking about when I say that, you know, we have a handle on it, we're working on it, is that, you know, we have the list of deferred maintenance. We shared that with your office today.

We're specifically talking about deferred maintenance now. Those lists are known. They worked on with, our office at OFO and the complex area superintendents on and principals on prioritizing which one of those during any budget cycle, you know, is gonna rise to the top of the list. You know, we apply the equitable approach that the board has as a policy so that we're spending about equally in all of the areas.

And based on that, we ask for a budget appropriation according to our six year plan that we submit to the legislature, which is about 200,000,000 for deferred maintenance every year in the last plan we submitted October 2025.

How much did you submit for?

That's, this one.

The latest one that for this budget, how much did you how much is it, the bottom line that you're asking for?

So for fiscal year 27 we planned, 200,000,000, and then 28-29, 200,000,000, and then fiscal year 30-31, 150,000,000 each, and that's in our six year program. So for the deferred maintenance, it's a $200,000,000 and it's described in our plan.

So those are prioritized, the deferred maintenance list among the different schools and districts, and then we ask for an appropriation based on that. Whether or not we get it to do those projects depends on the cycle.

So what is the total, reported backlog of your CIPs?

Of the just the deferred maintenance?

CIP. Do you know the CIP funds? What is the reported backlog?

So it's difficult to answer that question because it really depends on what we're looking at and what we're measuring. So

Okay. Let's make it simple. DOE unspent CIP funds?

Unspent CIP. So for fiscal year 27 supplemental CIP budget, we have 784,000,000 approximately that we're spending on. And that's in our capital improvement project budget that we submit to the to the board. And we break that down in our budget ask that the board approve for fiscal year 2027. That's a supplemental budget that we're asking for.

And when you look at deferred maintenance, you know, we are we're asking for the 200,000,000. You know, whether or not we get that, you know, that's another another question. I can provide this to you, but it's online.

So what is the obligated CIP funds total?

Obligated?

CIP funds.

I can get that to you. I don't have that in front of me. of me.

There is that outstanding request we have from you. No. That's fine. What

I'm asking you right now. What is the obligated CIP funds?

We'll give that to you. I think it's

About 1,072,000.000? I mean, it's interesting how I get these numbers and you don't. And then the unspent DOD CIP, 2,700,000.0? Billion. I'm sorry.

2,700,000,000.0. Thank you. Okay. So the obligated is, yeah, billions.

Yeah. We can confirm that for you. I'm not sure where those numbers are coming from, but we can we've got the list that, you've asked us to provide. We're working with your office. You should get that on Monday.

That's, staff has been going through that, and that tells the obligated and as a snapshot

in time. A case that we should not be taking this away, then we need to feel confident that you folks know exactly how much, where we're at, what you're doing about it, but you you can't even provide that information to us when we ask. And you know I'm asking questions that I probably already know the answer. And if I know the answer, then why don't you know the answer?

Because we want to be precise. And the numbers I'm

asking for precise. I'm asking for an idea, whether it's 1,700,000,000 or 2,300,000,000. Give me give me some idea. So maybe you're saying just 2,000,000,000, but give me an idea. Where are we at?

I I don't wanna throw out numbers. I'm sorry. I wanna be precise. We're we're providing you with the Okay. Worksheets you wanted, and I don't have precise numbers as that snapshot in time.

Can you I mean, you hire people, supposedly, that can deal with all of this. So I'm just asking that when you you guys know the bills, you're making a case, you have your testimony, you're opposing it, which is fine, but give us reasons why we should keep it with you, you know, and if you come without the numbers, if you come without giving us all of this stuff, then we're not gonna we're not gonna support what you're telling us.

You gotta give us reasons to do this, and if and we don't we don't have a lot of time for you to keep coming back to us, and we've gone back and forth. I know myself has gone back and forth. It's taken a lot of time to just get stuff, so it's it's it's very frustrating.

And you know, I'm I'm trying not to come down and and and and but it's to the point where, come on, we're talking about billions of dollars here. Right? And all we all we ask is that you give us the information,

and

you should have this information.

Senator, if my correct me if I'm wrong, if I'm if I'm understanding correctly, Senator, your staff has been working with our with, deputy Suki's office. And, the what was requested of us, I believe we did provide the information, and and the request subsequently might have changed. So we are working. I will get that most current request

To Senator Kim's office by Monday. Okay.

Okay.

Well, when the things change, you know, from the time we spoke with you till now, it didn't change that much. So what are the numbers you told us then then? Where where is that? I mean, yes, you gave it to us, but can you tell for the public?

I I the Yeah. That's my point. You

can't. Right. You can't.

Yeah.

You're not ready for it. Okay. Questions?

So I guess when you when you talk about these district level project coordinators, right, what what what what is the vision and and what and you you say they have it under control, but I guess what is the ultimate goal, you know, of where you guys wanna be?

What what is what is the metric that you're gonna use to to make sure that there is some type of improvement from this year or past years into the future so that we we understand collectively what the definition of success is. Maybe we'll start from there.

Well, we have a there's a lot of projects. No.

No. I know there's a lot of projects. I think I think what I when you when we turn all these numbers, what I what we gotta grasp, especially that 200,000,000, I'll I'll let you finish. But with that 200,000,000, what we really need to understand is what can you actually spend? You can ask for 200,000,000.

If we give you the 200,000,000, I don't know if you can actually spend the 200,000,000. Right? But

We'll factor that into your response.

Right. So what what we can spend is what we request in our budget. And so that is in the board approved budget that

You think you can spend 200,000,000?

Well, we have the projects itemized in here about what we're doing. And over the course of the biennium, well, we can spend you know, if we're appropriated, we can spend it on the projects that we've identified.

But I guess the question is is with these district coordinators, are are they what is the timeline of that? Yes, you might have the money, but then what is what is the timeline for them to actually expend the money, right, out the door, not just encumber, expand and and the project completed because I'm sure, you know, when when we start to give you 200,000,000, 200,000,000, at some they're just gonna have too many projects. And so that's what we're trying to understand.

Are you when are you gonna get a handle on what is it that we can actually get through the system in a timely manner? And what what are those metrics that we should be able to see over a course of a period of time so that we have some level of confidence that things are are flowing?

Right? And I know I know you have your challenges with with personnel.

Yes. Challenging. So the projects we've identified are the projects we plan that we can complete. That's why we're asking for funding for these particular projects. And then, you know, through the sesh legislative session, there are other add ons and changes.

And so then we have to reassess what we can can do at the outcome of the legislative session. But we we are confident about the projects we identified that we can So so why do we expand?

Why is the chair bringing up such a high unspent balance then?

Because we're we're looking at and that's why I'm hesitant to provide just numbers off the top of my head because I'm responsible. You know, I I don't know where the other numbers come from, but I'm responsible. So I cannot put numbers off the top of my head. But there's different ways of looking at it.

There's these old projects that were sort of line items that are collection of projects that are, you know, in different phases of planning and no money for construction yet and, you know, or, you know, can be completed yet, need completion funds.

And that that's the table that the staff is putting together or put together and, you know,

put together.

And that's great. I I think having that data is good. Yeah. Well, I think what what I personally I can't speak for

of the members. What I personally would like to see is what is your timeline on cleaning that all up? I understand that you're new to this, but great. Now that you you can look at a new set of eyes, but what is the timeline of us closing those discrepancies, right, and and making sure that, okay, there's we're all gonna be clear. This is the number.

the rest

This is how it's derived. Whatever numbers are out there, you have to debunk that those numbers are wrong or else we're we're gonna believe what people are gonna tell us. Right? But but you gotta be clear on how we're gonna get to that.

I agree. And these are these are the projects of the highest need identified by the department working with the schools No.

I understand moving forward what you're gonna need. But I think what we're we're really asking is do we have the handle on all the unspent funds? Right? Because what we love you to say is, okay, there is no unspent funds. It's all spent.

But I don't know if we can say that at this point. Right? Right.

And so if we're talking about unspent funds, then we're talking about appropriations that have been made that we are currently putting into contracts to get projects done. So we are on course to get all of our money into contracts. So we have very minimal lapse moving forward for the projects that are identified. So, you know, we are comfortable with those. So that's a different question from this backlog, of projects.

And it's a different question from, you know, if we had all the money in the world and we fixed everything, how much, you know, could we deferred maintenance, you know, in a larger, you know, way

No. I I get it. And I I think what it's it's a level of confidence. Right? Because if we know if there's a level of confidence that things can get done, I think I think then the the the whole point is that we we will fight to get you more money.

But if there's a level of confidence that it's gonna drag out and out and out, right, then we're just gonna keep waiting, and we're gonna be like, okay. Well, we can wait till next year, and then the and it's a snowball effect. Right? So I think getting the correct information to me is really critical because then we can we can say you your numbers are solid. Right?

And I I don't know if we're at

that point.

And I think

that was the whole point of a lot

of these bills is that we just need to we need to clean this all up.

And I think that's the whole conversation, the interplay that we've been having, but I I think we just need to be clear. Right. Because I think a lot of numbers are being thrown around today.

Yeah. Yeah. And so, you know, the the deferred maintenance list that we provide, to senators or chair's office today, that has all the, amounts, and the identified deferred maintenance for each of the complex areas.

Well well, that's good. And I

and I think hopefully we can keep that list up, right, in terms of it. It shouldn't take us months and months to figure out. Maybe maybe we can figure out how do we streamline it so that we we know on a on a rolling basis what what is our situation. Right.

And then one one thing that we're working on is not not related to this bill, but we we're trying to, look at the the apps tech tech we have, you know, the CPT you hear about in the Maxima, which does R and M and CPT, which does the CIP. Those are due for upgrades. And so we're looking at, you know, not just upgrading it, but how we get value from making changes to it, especially with sort of the outward facing reporting part. It's a bit clunky.

You know, we'd like it to be clearer and more transparent.

Okay. Well well, hopefully, you can wrap this all up, and and then we can all be all clear on what what is the situation at this point. And hopefully soon, so at least we can go into conference knowing what what is the situational analysis of the DOE.

Alright. Thank you, chair. Yeah. Let me follow-up with the group of Richie.

So there's just two there's two trains of thought going on right now. One is we actually wanna know the exact numbers or close to that as to what is out there, which is what we've been working on. But what I'm asking and what we're asking today is, you know, when you talk about contracts, yeah, you're gonna put everything into contract, but that's how we are into the situation where we have all of these monies that's encumbered in contracts and it's not completed for whatever reasons.

So just putting these monies, these millions of dollars into contracts doesn't necessarily say it's gonna get done, and that's what I'm trying to find out from you. Not necessarily the exact amount of $2,000,000,000, but what is the sense of the of of the amount that's sitting out there and what you are capable of doing?

You're saying you're able to do $2,000,000 each year, to for these projects, but you you're not even addressing all the other projects that have not been completed. Are you able to do that? How are we gonna bring that numbers down? So I'm trying to get a sense from you folks as to where are we at in all of these buckets and whether or not you're capable of addressing these projects. And not necessarily I don't wanna throw numbers on the top of my head.

That that part is in here.

Part I'm asking you now is where are we? How big is this elephant? And you're asking every year 200,000,000. Every year that DOE has asked, there's a portion of that that didn't get done, and they keep adding to this unspent. Keep adding to this backlog of projects that is just sitting there, and the monies are sitting there.

Yeah.

So I'm trying to get a handle of it. And if you don't have a handle of it, then you we don't have confidence that you folks can do this. Yeah. That's why these bills are here.

If I if I could clarify, I think over the past couple of years with the movement of, line item to lump sum because of the legislature's help on that. I think the team has been delivering projects and have been reporting in their reports to the board just about quarterly on on the amount of projects that they're completing. And it's, you know, high

It hasn't made yet.

It's a lot of but it's more than in the past. And so the projects that are being completed, again, are the priority projects that I identified in coordination with, schools, the complex areas, and and legislators, to get those priority projects done.

And then, you know, there's all those line items from the past that you know, and deferred maintenance that, you know, when we get we prioritize and when we get funding, they they kinda end up on the top of the list, and we try to build those, but we're really focused on the priorities.

Yeah. Well, you know, two or three years ago, some of those priorities were priorities and now no longer priorities because you have other priorities that have taken their place. So, again, you know, you're talking about a continuum of backlog that priorities all of a sudden get to the bottom of the list because now you have new priorities.

Senator. So in 2023, the Department CIP unspent funds was $2,400,000,000 Now according to your facilities portal, the Hawaii Department of Education, your facilities portal, your last reporting of 01/07/2025, the unspent DOE CIP funds is $2,700,000,000. This is your guys' own reporting now. This is your own numbers where if you rewind two years prior 2023 is $2,400,000,000. So now we're at $2,700,000,000.

And I I wanna be able to move these conversations forward so we can actually bring to the table some hardcore data so we can pass bills to get you folks the money you need, so we can get the improvements that we need in our schools and in our facilities. But you make it very, very difficult when you're supposed to be the subject matter subject expert, and you don't even know these numbers.

And so this is why we get frustrated is because you come here and you don't have the numbers and we want to move forward from this conversation of unspent CIP funds. And I have a report from your own portal. These are facts and you don't even know that and I know that.

So how can we move forward in the conversation when you don't bring us accurate numbers, you don't have accurate data, and we're not able to move forward in that conversation? It makes it very, very difficult. And right now we're talking about semantics between deferred maintenance and CIPs where pretty much the entire bundle that we're talking about here is how much money the department has tied up and it's in the billions of dollars. And when you don't acknowledge that, we can't move forward in this discussion.

We're gonna stay here.

And once we get to conference committee, we're not gonna have anything. So you're not giving us anything to work with. So how can I know these reportings and these numbers and you guys don't have these numbers? And this is from your own portal.

And here we are, we have we have programs in my community of a tutoring program that is working costing $30,000 a year that's actually helping our kids and we're gonna have to cut that because if we have to tighten up on budget, that's the thing that's gonna get cut.

A tutoring program that's actually helping with literacy, with math, with reading, with writing. And now we have to cut back on that program that's actually working. And you guys cannot even come here and help us to break down the unspent funds that you guys have without even acknowledging the facts that you guys have them from your own website. This is your guys' own reports. Nobody's making this up.

So go ahead.

Yeah. We've provided the numbers.

Okay. But you've never said that orally. Right? You just said earlier, I don't know. I don't have that information.

You say that all the time.

In front of me. I I've we've provided numbers.

How hard is it to remember $2,700,000,000? Like, this is a lot.

For student. Yep. We've provided the data.

No. This is a different set. I kept telling you this. This is a different data. This is the data specifically by schools.

We're asking you for the unspent funds, which as pointed out and as I pointed out, we have the numbers. How come you don't have the numbers? You don't come prepared?

We we have the numbers. We we provided it in different forms to you. We're gonna provide you in the updated form of funding. Please.

So, So Senator, we we will get you I'm

trying to help you.

We will get you the numbers. If I may ask though, the numbers that you got is from where?

Your your portal.

Okay. So we will take a look at it. We'll get the unspent unspent allocation.

Why wouldn't you come prepared with that numbers if that's your area of expertise? Mean, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that we're gonna ask you that. This is a mean, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that we're gonna ask you that. This is a bill on CIP. This is a bill you don't want us to take it away from you.

You want us to allow you to do it. If you're gonna ask us allow you to do it, then you have to show me that you're capable, that you know the numbers. Right?

We'll get that to you soon.

Elementary. Kindergarten. Not not high school. This is elementary.

We'll get it for you.

Well, this is why I want

you to I'm sorry. Sorry. I don't want you to get it for me. I want you to have it when you come before us so the public out there, the the the parents out there, the schools out there know what it is that we're facing. And and my colleagues know when they send us these bills, they're gonna cost more and more money, why I may not be hearing their bills because of all of this funding.

Okay? So there's a reason why we have these public meetings so that you can provide the information to the public. Not, oh, we give you the numbers. If you gave me the numbers, then you should know what the numbers are. K.

I'm trying to call.

The this 27, does it sound familiar? Does it sound outrageous? Is it too much? Is it too little? Is it around the ballpark?

I mean, help us out here. Yeah. We wanna help you folks.

That is one number that's out there. And but the more accurate one is are the tables that we're providing, to the Senator. We have a different version on Monday that's gonna come out.

So So I wasn't privy to this report, so I'm not sure exactly what this is. But I'm just talking about the unspent CIP funds of your folks reporting now. This is not I'm not Googling it. I'm not chat g p ting it. This is from your guys' own reporting from your facilities portal.

So what I'm saying is how can we move forward if we can't even come to an agreement with where the funds are at? So when we are hearing a bill that is empowering SFA to do what SFA was created to do, and you folks are saying that, oh, no. We've got a handle on it. We can do it. It it's hard for us to have trust in the department when we can't even get an accurate number or even come to the table and say, hey.

Yeah. You know what? That that's where it's at. Where did you get this from? I got it from your portal.

And so this is why it gets really frustrating. And at our previous hearing, we're talking about school impact fees and we don't even have those numbers from you at that time. So it's it's it's it's frustrating for us when this is such a priority in all of our communities, and we need to come to the table and figure something out for our teachers, for our students, for our facilities, for our deferred maintenance, for our programs, for our curriculum. And it's it's it's it's been quite frustrating.

So I apologize.

I know it may feel personal, and then I don't know it may be difficult to sit across, but you have to see it from our end that we're begging you for help because you guys are the only ones that have access to this information, and we're begging you to work with us by giving us the accurate numbers. And just to be honest with us, and if it's something that's a little bit too much on your plate, please let us know.

That's why SFA was created for this particular for for this particular scenario. Sorry. You look a little confused.

No. No. I'm I'm not. When you said SFA was created for this scenario.

Only because we're talking about this bill, which is what's prompting all of these conversations. So earlier, we talked about the vouchers, and then you guys said that, you know, oh, we'll need more staff. We'll need more this. We'll need more that. And it's like, man, you you guys got you have to meet us more halfway, you know, because these meetings are just as uncomfortable for us as it is for you guys.

But we have to keep the department accountable because our communities cannot just sit by while we receive responses like, oh, we'll get back to you, you know? So

And just to set the record straight, what you have given is the deferred maintenance by schools Yes. Which we've asked for. But that doesn't answer this question. So don't say you gave my office the report because it also says here no CIP report yet. So you're you're not answering what we're asking for.

And so don't rely and say we provide it to your office because you have not.

Yeah. That was in the previous report we sent you, but we revised working with your office and we'll

have a money general idea of what is the unstead funds that is sitting there. K. Thank you.

Thank you.

SFA, thank you. So you used to be with the DOE facilities. Right? Yes. Do you have any idea of what the unspent funds are or any idea?

Right. So I can give you a history. What happened was, right, the House Finance subpoenaed the records or threatened to sub subpoena the records because House Finance.

House Finance. Yeah. Because When was this?

2019.

Okay.

And then

Is that what we have to do then, subpoena the records today?

Well, that's what house finance did. Okay. But house finance at that time was led by an attorney.

K.

So so as a result, all the records were provided from the system of record, which is the accounting system. And that's what led to all the development of these tracking systems for transparency that showed everything, which showed unspent funds, obligated funds, construction contracts, design contracts, construction purchase orders, blanketing, it was completely transparent because it was a threat of subpoena. Either that, you don't provide it. That's a class c felony, and you're subject to civil penalties.

Okay.

So that whole system was set up. That systems now are being turned off or not maintained. So that's why there is no it's hard to find out what our fiscal position is. The key of the data has to come from the system of record. Anytime it's abstracted in a report, you don't have any idea.

Right?

So why has it been turned off?

I don't

know. It's just not working now.

So, superintendent, why has it been turned off?

I can I have no answer to that, sir?

But it is turned off. Right?

to that. Well, when I tried going on, it's not on. When I tried getting update on Calabrio Bridge or any other thing, one of the tenants, it's not on there. And and it's supposed to be the tracking system. And I brought this up before.

I have no answer

I brought this up last year. I brought this up the year before, and I showed you guys the and I think I've showed you in my office how the it's not the numbers are not there. So somebody's turned it off, and you folks are not maintaining it. So that's that's that's one problematic. Okay.

So what what is on the portal that we're seeing, and what is it? What what is that large number not to be to the penny, but give us an idea.

No. So so the system is not current. So we don't know what the actual numbers are. The reason why it's so large is during a series of time for four summers, the the the normal course of CIP is, right, a biennium budget, you get a lot of money, you design, you encumber, then you spend the next summer and you do construction for the next two summers, and that's the normal course. What happened was for four summers, construction wasn't scheduled.

So that's what created this incredible obligated funds backlog of a billion dollars. Because when you miss four summers, you can never catch up, and that's the situation. That's why the obligated funds is so astronomical.

So what's the answer? How do we fix it?

You really have to stop giving appropriations for probably So

much so.

The next bannion budget, two years, and you just have to grind away at this incredible obligated funds backlog of construction contracts. And until you do that, all you're doing is you're just digging the hole deeper.

Okay. Comment on that, Senator Quintana? Yeah. You agree that we have this backlog and something's gotta be done?

I I do. Senator, I definitely believe that we need to do it. We we something should be done for the backlog. How do we do it? Again, you know, I refer to my team.

I do know if if I'm not mistaken. My team is gonna provide

you with some

So if if I'm not mistaken, and mister Fujitani can can comment on this. The four summers that, the backlog occurred in, I believe, was during started with COVID

or during the COVID period. Yes.

It doesn't matter what happened. But that was that's important, I think, because during that time, we couldn't do construction was not being done in the department.

Well, whatever happened, we have this backlog.

We do.

The question is, what are we doing about it?

What are

we doing about it?

So we are as deputy sheriff, we are assessing where we are. We're moving forward with the projects that we have in the lead funding that currently the legislature gives to us. We're we're implementing that and moving that forward. We do have a backlog, and, mister Fujitani, I think, is well aware of the backlog that we have because he was the director of, auxiliary services at that time. And so it is extensive.

The exact number, I don't have that exact number for you. Yeah. I do know we do have a large backlog, and we are working on it.

Number, but I wanna get But

we are we are definitely working on it. So we're there's kind of two things happening. Right? One, we're keeping up with

the trying to keep up with

the work that we have now based on the allocations that we get from the legislature to move forward and at the same time trying to address, the number of line items that are historical.

But if