Senate Standing Committee on Hawaiian Affairs

Hello, everyone. This is the joint committee on Hawaiian affairs and and committee on water, land, culture, and the arts. This is the Wednesday, April 8, 1PM agenda here in Conference Room 224. We have one agenda item on the agenda. We have a two minute time limit for testifiers, so please stick to that.

And if we need to break for IT problems or whatever, we'll reschedule and post that. So with that, on the agenda, we have SCR 117, SR 110, Nominating John d Wahe'e the third for induction into the Aloha Order of Merit. First up, we have OHA.

Aloha Mai Kakou. I'm Lola Berlin with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. OHA stands on our written testimony in support of this resolution. Governor legacy of one is one of courage, vision, and unwavering dedication to our lahui. His work has had a lasting and transformative impact on Hawaii and its people.

As a delegate in the nineteen seventy eight constitutional convention, Governor Waihee played a foundational role in establishing OHA and defining its Kuleana as a trust entity to advance native Hawaiian self governance. As our first native Hawaiian governor, governor elevated native Hawaiian issues and brought them to the national stage. His leadership and collaboration with president Bill Clinton was critical in the enactment of public law one zero three dash one fifty, also known as the apology resolution.

Governor Waihe'e has continued to be a steadfast advocate beyond his time in elected office through his leadership and in initiatives such as Kanani Olo Balu. Governor Waihe'e is a pioneer that embodied the Aloha spirit throughout his career.

His legacy continues as he remains active in advocating for Hawaii, Hawaiians, and the that he loves. Mahalo Nui.

Thank you. On Zoom, we have Cedric Duarte, IT. Aloha Cedric, you have two minutes.

Aloha. Thank you. Aloha, Chairs, Vice Chairs, committee Members. Cedric Duarte on behalf of Kalihipala Mahawai Civic Club. You have our written testimony, and my apologies.

I can't be there in person. Our club is honored to have nominated, John D Wahe the third for the Aloha Order of Merit, and we speak in support of SCR 117 and SR 1110.

I wanna acknowledge the founder of our first president of our club, Auntie Susie Pai, who established Kalihi Club, Hawaiian Service Club in 1969 and was president when a young lawyer named John Wahei returned from his education on the continent and was seeking to get involved in this community and became a member of our Hawaiian Civic Club.

From those humble beginnings, we all saw him become the first native Hawaiian governor in The United States, and we know his work from, advancing the establishment of the office of land affairs to his continued service in our community today. His Reflector his Ref his record Reflects the lifetime of Kuleana to Hawaii and our Lahui.

Governor John embodies the very spirit this honor represents. We thank you for the opportunity to testify, and we hope this body will advance these measures model.

Thank you. Moving on on Zoom, we have Limomi Khan. IT. Oh, there we go.

I'm coming to you from Las Vegas because I'm here on another nonprofit event and couldn't be home for this meeting. I personally wanted to be there to give you my testimony and to just express heartfelt support for this nomination. Governor Waihee has been an inspiration to the people of Hawaii and especially to native Hawaiians.

His demeanor and the way he conducts meetings and the way that he embraces the whole community in the way that he continues to be an advocate for all of us, whether we be native Hawaiians or not, both locally and international level is is so deeply appreciated.

And for all of these reasons, and especially for the reasons that I articulated in my written testimony, as well as being a member of Kalihi Palama Hawaiian Civic Club, for all of those reasons, I encourage you to please look up and pass this request to in doubt governor Waihee into the Aloha Order of Merit, especially because he really and truly embodies the word of Aloha.

Allah.

Mahalo. Thank you. Those are all the testifiers we have that is signed up. Is there anybody in the room that would like to testify? Seeing none.

K. Opening up for questions. Senators?

I just Chairs. Yeah. Yeah. You know, it's something that we look forward to recognition, and I think it's so appropriate that we do this for, you know, one who is, with us still. But I'm just curious.

Can somebody explain to us what is the what is the Aloha Order of Merit? Is that embodied in or it's just

You wanna ask someone to come up?

Yeah. Maybe OHA.

OHA.

Is that part of policy or there's

Come on up.

Some recognition that's part of a program that annually you folks do? Or

I believe my understanding of the Aloha order of merit, we have it in our testimony here. It's for individuals conferred the lifetime title of member of the Aloha order of merit shall have achieved national or international recognition in their fields either by a single event or by the totality of their work that has been either pioneering in their field or has been outstanding in the long term. I believe it's in statutes. Oh. And so this is why it's a resolution for for both chambers for this.

Okay. Our HRS? Yes. Yes. Okay.

This is not an OHA that No. Yeah. Okay. We were very excited to see the resolution. Yeah.

Actually, I've been here many years, but I've never seen something like this. So it's it's it's great that it's being used.

I believe there's only two other members who have been inducted.

So Do you know?

I know governor Ariyoshi, and then I can't recall that this other one, but it is very limited in scope, so.

Oh, great. Good. I guess we have to have some work done on our end or read the statutes. Thank you so much. Yeah.

Thank you. It's my understanding. It's the highest civilian merit Great. Steve, awards.

We learn something every day. Go ahead.

Any other questions? Seeing none, we are going to go into recess real quick. Reconvening the committee on Hawaiian affairs and water, land, and culture of the arts for the 1:00 agenda concerning SCR 117, SR 110. Any comms, questions before we vote? Senator Inouye.

Thank you, Chairs. I do, it's an honor to support this measure, and I just wanted to add just for some historical background. When I was mayor back in 1990s, governor Waihee was the governor at that time. Unfortunately, during that time, the geothermal well blew during my administration attempting to create geothermal. Can you imagine what was before my administration with the community up in arms because the geothermal plant was next door to it.

With that said, I, governor, all came to my rescue and through the months that we had to do to clean up the place, to make sure that the air quality is stopped immediately, which it was impossible to do. So it wouldn't get into the communities that governor and his administration gave opportunity for me to meet every week to find solutions for several months, even though my office and my home and everybody else, we had people against me because I took away the permit.

I had to do it for the safety of our community and the governor and his staff for many, many months, we worked on what we're going to do. And my ask was that governor, we need to make sure that we do address the air quality. And I want Department of Health.

We need to do all these things. And every week I was up here with this administration coming to create policies and how we're going to have geothermal, if ever that it was my responsibility to lift the permit so they can continue. If you haven't known, if you got pressure from senior senators in Congress from Hawaii telling me to give back the permit, and I refuse to do so until governor and the state of Hawaii helped me to create a better place.

And I'll tell you what happened thereafter, look where we are with geothermal and renewable energy. But if it wasn't for the governor, Waihe'e, and his administration at that time, we would not be in a position where we are today with creating renewable energy for our for our state as well and to make life better.

With that said

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Senator Ihara?

I wanted to acknowledge, John Waiheʻe, for his contribution in connecting the state of Hawaii with the kingdom's values and way of governing, more of a stewardship govern- governance, through the constitutional convention. I was one of the eight vice presidents at the convention. And he was, a de facto leader under Bill Patey. A- A, who helped with other missionary descendants protect the convention from external influence.

So we, as a delegate there, and Senator Fukunaga is a member, still active as well, experienced the, it was a fantastic experience of of a civic rejuvenation, not just the Hawaiian renaissance, but a governance renaissance.

And where we inputted into the state constitution, the law of disciplinary panel, reconnecting ourselves with the environment, with the role of water as a, to be held in trust, to recognize indigenous gathering rights, to establish OHA, and and others. Law of the spinner paddle in particular. And so with that, we, I felt, that in looking back, especially where, we are now connected to the, carrying values of, of the kingdom's time when they governed and so on.

I consider our governance is a hybrid where, we are, if we return and we we we operate the state like the royals did during the kingdom in a caring way, all unified inside of a a Western, you know, system that is based on you don't don't let anyone have all the power. Distrust people because the power, when it's all consolidated, can be abused, which it does sometimes.

And so and so on a local level with a state legislature, I see us as a fulfilling the vision of the Konkan and us using the stewardship and carrying the land and the people as our North Star as we go forward. And it hasn't always been that way. And and I think, by acknowledging our governor, Waihe, it's really, it's sort of it's like saying that we, we're on that path as well. And so I applaud the, acknowledgement, and I support their resolution. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator. Any other comments, questions before we confer the vote? Okay. The chairs have it conferred, and it's the intention to move this unamended. Recognition Chair, but there's no discussion, no disagreement, on SCR 117, SR 110.

Aye. Chair votes aye.

Okay.

Vice Chair for the vote.

Committee on Hawaiian Affairs, recommendation of the chair is to pass unamended for SCR 117, SR 110. [Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. And for water land. For water land, same recommendation.

Thank you, Chairs, for the committee on water, land, culture, and the arts. Chair's recommendation is to pass SCR 117 and SR 110 to pass unamended. [Roll Call] Is excused, measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. We're at the end of our agenda. We're adjourned.

Convening the joint committees on water, land, culture, the arts, and agriculture and the environment on our 1:01pm agenda here in State Capital Conference Room 224. We have several resolutions up today, which will take together both the Concurrent Resolution and the Senate resolution at the same time beginning with SCR 100 and SR 94. I'll also be asking folks to limit your testimony. We'll be providing one minute testifier to make sure there's time to hear from all testifiers so folks don't get cut off.

So with that, we'll be beginning with SDR 100 and SR 94 convening a working group to establish and structure a nonprofit to support the state with sanctuaries and conservation related efforts.

Testifying first is DLNR. Good afternoon.

Hello, Chair and Vice Chair. My name is Jason Omit. I'm here on behalf of, the Chair of Department of Land and Natural Resources, and we stand by our testimony and support for this measure. I'm available for questions if you guys have any. Thank you.

That's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on these measures this afternoon? Hearing none, are there any questions? Hearing none. All right.

Let's move on to SCR 168 and SR 159 requesting the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development to convene a demolition waste reduction working group. And testifying first on 168 and 159 are Oh, PSD.

Aloha Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the committee. My name is Danielle Bass, sustainability coordinator for the office planning and Sustainable Development. We offer testimony offering comments. We do support the intent of this measure. We find this to both be timely and necessary since Hawaii is facing increasing pressure on our landfills, and especially given the state's recent storms and ongoing disaster recovery efforts, we find that there needs to be a coordinated cross sector working group to advance the deconstruction material reuse and reuse and circular economy strategies.

We do share concerns regarding implementation of this measure. This measure puts the responsibility on OPSD specifically the state sustainability branch, which has been on record with the Legislature requesting staff for the last six years. It does not provide any appropriation or staffing to support and carry out this work. I'm available for questions.

Mahalo.

Thank you. That is everyone who had signed up to testify on 168 and 159. Is there anyone else wishing to testify this afternoon? Hearing none, are there any questions?

Sure. Did we have any comments from, I don't see any from the Department of Health. And reason I'm asking is, waste reduction, or even the planning, and adopting of waste, areas in our state or counties that, applications for this process is, is one that comes out of department of health as well. So I tend to agree with the comments, from OPSD. I'm not sure if this is the appropriate agency to have this type of working group under its management operations.

That's just one concern I have. What is the appropriate agency to do this? Thank you, Chair. Okay.

Further questions? Hearing none. Alright. Thank you, everybody. Let's move on to the next measure, SCR 133 SR 125 requesting DLNR in consultation with Department of AG and Biosecurity adopt the rules prohibiting commercial aquaculture.

Testifying first is Department of AG. Good afternoon.

Todd Lowe Department of Agriculture, we submitted comments. And, we're here for any questions.

Thank you. Thank you. Next is Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Aloha and Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chairs, committee Members. Charlie Taylor on behalf of DLNR's division of aquatic resources. We stand on our written testimony providing comments and are happy to answer any questions.

Thanks very much. Up next on Zoom is the Animal Welfare Institute.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chairs, and Members of the committee. I'm Heather Mitchell. I'm an animal welfare scientist testifying on behalf of the Animal Welfare Institute in strong support of SR 100 and twenty five and SCR 100 and thirty three to adopt rules to prohibit commercial octopus aquaculture. Octopuses are among the least suitable animals for intensive aquaculture. Decades of research show that they are highly intelligent, behaviorally complex, and capable of experiencing pain.

They are also solitary predators and can become aggressive or cannibalistic when confined together. Facilities raising octopuses have reported mortality rates above fifty percent, losses that would be unacceptable in any animal production system. And there is still no humane scalable method of slaughtering octopuses for food. Given the serious welfare concerns, potential marine ecosystem harms, and pressure on Hawaii's limited resources, these resolutions take a thoughtful and precautionary step to prevent unnecessary suffering.

Thank you very much. Up next is the animal legal defense fund, also on Zoom.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chairs, and members of the committees. My name is Lindsey Verheilig testifying on behalf of the Animal Legal Defense Fund in strong support of these measures. I would just like to take this time to point out for the committees that a prohibition on octopus farming is meant to protect not only the octopuses themselves but local interests. There are currently no industrial octopus farms in Hawaii, so no one would be forced out of business by a prohibition, on octopus farming.

It would not impose any restrictions on the fishing, sale, or consumption of wild caught octopus, considered an important protein by many.

In fact, it would protect local fishermen and the marine ecosystem from potential environmental disaster. The environmental risks of octopus farming are numerous, including toxic pollution from runoff containing high levels of nitrogen and phosphorus, changing water temperatures, the risk of escaped octopuses decimating local populations, and the high volume of local feed needed to farm them. All of these things pose too significant of a risk to Hawaii's local economy and delicate ecosystems to allow to occur.

For these reasons, I respectfully urge committees to impasse to pass these important measures. Mahalo for your time.

Thank you And up next, also an Anna Maidment. I'm pronouncing that wrong, I believe. From the same organization? Yes. Okay.

Aloha, Chairs, Vice Chairs, and Members of the committee. My name is Anna Mayman, and I'm testifying on behalf of the Animal Legal Defense Fund and as a law student at the University of Hawaii in strong support of SR 125. Aquaculture already poses environmental risk through pollution, waste, and disease, but aquifer farming would be significantly worse. These operations release excess nutrients, which can degrade water quality, harm coral reefs, and risk spreading diseases to wild populations and humans.

Octopuses are carnivorous and require large amounts of wild caught fish, increasing pressure on ocean systems.

They're also widely recognized as sentient, highly intelligent, and solitary animals, making confinement especially harmful. Through my experience as a shark diver, I've had the rare opportunity to see octopus in the wild, and it's clear that they are not animals suited for industrial farming. Hawaii has the opportunity to lead by preventing these harms before they begin. For these reasons, I respectfully urge you to support SR 125. Mahalo.

Thank you. Up next is the animal law section of HSBA.

Aloha, Chair Gabbard, Chair Lee, and Members of these committees. My name is Savannah Sherman. I'm a Hawaii based attorney and the Chair of the Animal Law Section of the Hawaii State Bar Association. Just a disclaimer before I begin. This is the testimony of the section alone, not necessarily the views of HSBA as a whole.

On behalf of this section, I respectfully urge Members of this committee to vote in favor of these resolutions. This would not be a prohibition on all aquaculture. Many forms which can be, sustainable, ecologically responsible, and humane. Octopus farming, however, presents unique challenges for several reasons. The first of those is that it would present risk to subsistence fishing, due to the risk of escape of, the octopus into the wild.

One example of this I included in my written testimony was an octopus in New Zealand that escaped a zoo by climbing out of an enclosure, locating a drainage pipe halfway across the room and then traveling 164 feet into the ocean. If we were to have this here, it's not a question of if they will escape. It's when, and this would be disastrous for our environment and subsistence fishing. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. And on Zoom, animal research initiative.

Aloha, Chair and Members of the committee. Mahalo for having me today. My name is Thomas Coates, and I am representing Animal Research Initiative. Octopus farming has been attempted and failed on multiple occasions with the primary challenge being a catastrophically elevated mortality rate largely caused by cannibalism. However, insistence on forcing this practice in the interest of financial gain leads to a wide array of further problems.

Octopus are vicious and venomous predators, and a common occurrence of accidental release has been documented on many occasions and poses a threat to surrounding life and waters. Additionally, high feeding requirements means the elevated waste, which also damages local waters with persistent organic pollution. This farming practice is unviable, unsustainable, and possibly most importantly, unnecessary. Hawaii can prevent this problem before it starts. Please prioritize Hawaii's people and its waters.

Thank you for your time. Mahalo.

Thank you. Also on Zoom, Stacy Dawn Goodhue Souza Kaololuau.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

Thank you. And Kalika Tyra, also on Zoom. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Aloha, Chair and Members. My name is Kalika Taira. I'm a Hawaii resident living in Hawaii Kai, and I strongly support SCR 133. This resolution recognizes the environmental, economic, and all security risk of commercial octopus aquaculture, and it is critical that we keep this conversation grounded in those systemic impacts.

This is not a centered agriculture issue. We are discussing a highly intelligent issues, one that has been known to escape containment and survive outside of water for extended periods. Due to the combination of their impressive cognitive abilities as well as having soft boneless bodies with approximately 40,000,000 neurons in each of their arms, they have been known to be excellent escape artists.

Octopus aquaculture is not sustainable and it has never been successfully commercialized, meaning void would be assuming untested risk to our near shore ecosystems, fisheries, and food security. In The United Kingdom, a recent octopus population surge has led to documented declines of 30 to 50% in crab, lobster, and scallop fisheries.

This is not theoretical. It is happening right now. Research, thank you.

Very much. Okay. Thank you, everyone. That's everyone who had signed up to testify on these resolutions. Is there anyone else wishing to testify?

Alright. Hearing none, other questions?

Yeah. Department of Ag. As you know, I'm I'm a big supporter of aquaculture. Yes. K.

What's the difference between Taco that we all eat that you can buy in the store and octopus?

The difference? Thank you. Todd Lowe, Department of Agriculture. It's a I I'm not a marine biologist, so I don't know the exact species, but, as the, test other people have testified, we don't have aquaculture, octopus aquaculture in the state.

Presently. Presently.

And, several other testifiers said that there is only one documented place that has tried to figure out the life cycle assessment that's in Spain. It's not really on our radar as a state. We have other species and other avenues that we're focusing on to move ahead. That, to me, is a I don't want to say a low priority, but something that's not, on our, in our immediate, you know, bandwidth.

Because there's no commercial endeavor right now in aquaculture for that particular species. But what's the difference with the taco that I'm talking about? Is it considered an octopus? And why I say that is because that's for us who don't eat raw fish, octopus with miso and in your bars that you can buy and enjoy. I mean, so that's what I need to be answered because if there's an opportunity Yes.

That we don't have, and I know our fishermen goes out and go get, and fish on Tacos. So what's the difference between the Tacos and the octopus? If it's related, then it could be an endeavor on a certain species if Taco is a smaller octopus and if there's, you're talking about a certain variety of octopus that's prohibited, I can see that. But in the future, we're talking about having food on our table. So to me, if we're enjoying Taco now, what's gonna happen?

I mean, it's something that we gotta think about that kind of stuff. So to prohibit something that could be an aquaculture doesn't necessarily have to be in the ocean.

That's correct.

That's correct. Right?

So that that's almost someone said it philosophical level. Right? Prohibiting something that that's not happening now. But also looking in the future, we and there's other people in the room probably that are looking from the fisheries aspect. But there is ways around this with systems, with types of species that are indigenous and non indigenous, etcetera.

We look at this always in terms of agriculture and livestock and aquaculture. I don't really have a great answer for you, Senator.

Understand.

But as we this is a difficult subject. It comes up every year, it seems, several years. So, I don't really have.

Yeah, well, you know, if we have a policy, you know, and we don't do R and D on aquaculture as much as we should be on different species. You know, we do that with Moi, we have aquaculture, you know, we have different species as I talk about, but if we're going to kill something that probably could be something that we could foresee in the future on doing research and opportunity and development.

But to completely say we're gonna deny this today, I'm having a difficult time just to share with that person. Thank you. Thanks.

Okay. Further questions? Yeah. Oh, sorry to go ahead.

Thank you. So you you guy Department of or Department of AG and Bossier, I got a hard time after dealing with the CRB thing. You guys just screw on multi.

But Yes.

You guys are part of promulgating the rules with DLNR, right?

Well, so that's that's the interesting thing about this resolution. It's it's I'm talking about octopus aquaculture. DLNR, in our in our view, handles fisheries, and DOA handles aquaculture. So there is a separation. So working in conjunction with each other, yes, I believe that's if we were to go ahead with this, that we would be a partnership or somewhat of a collaboration.

So so you sound like go back to her question again.

Yes.

What is the difference between Taco and octopus?

Again, it it's probably down to a genus and a species, which I'm not up to speed with?

Would DLNR know that answer?

Okay. We're adding fishes to you.

So so what is the difference between Taco and octopus?

Because

Taco is just kind of a generic name. Although I know maybe in certain parts of the island, they'll refer to a specific species. But generally, what we're talking about is called the day octopus. It's called octopus cyanea. It's pretty common, commonly eaten.

It's, that's generally what you're gonna find. This, yeah, this resolution is more generally about all octopus species, I think, as you noted.

So Wow.

But, yeah.

Because I've seen them eat the night octopus too.

Yeah. Although even yeah. There's lots of rock octopus, a few different types.

And there's a certain period in our, in the weather and whatever, because we, we have, we have fishers in, in my, in Hilo. They go out, the fishers go out and there's a certain climate, I think, certain period, I can't remember. And you know, the boys always there's the, the, the alert that the, you know, it's season for, Taco fishing. So that's something that, we should really, you know, consider it's a food item.

So, you know, sustainability in the future, probably, I don't know what's gonna happen with the fishes, but if the fishes die, there's the octopus that's living.

At least we can

You know what's going on the island?

Yeah. And and our stores are selling. Okay. But nonetheless

I might have a bodge too.

Any any further questions?

Okay. Thank you.

One quick question. And I my understanding for this resolution, I can understand the industry side, but the research side, this does not prohibit research. Yeah. Correct? Is that your read of it?

That's correct. So, someone could still apply for a special activity permit through through Dart, and we could grant them one of those and they could still research the life cycle, for instance, things like that.

Alright. Yes. Thank you.

Thank you. Thanks folks.

Thank you. There's no further questions. Thank you. That is the end of our joint agenda here. So why don't we

You're working with decision making. Okay.

Terms having confirmed. Why don't we go straight into decision making beginning with SCR 100 and SR 94? For folks watching, we're gonna take take the vote on both resolutions, the concurrent and the Senate resolution at the same time. So first is SCR 100 and SR 94. The permission would be to move these forward both these resolutions forward.

Just cleaning it up a little bit, amending the title to read, establish a nonprofit, clarify the results are related to SB 3253, and clarify between the SCR and the SR co chairs on a task force in an SCR or versus chair on a task force for the SR. So with that, any discussion? If not, vice chair.

For the committee on water, land, culture and the arts, chair's recommendation to pass SCR 100 and SR 94 on, with amendments. Okay. [Roll Call] Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Same recommendation for AEN. Any discussion? Chair votes aye. Vice chair?

On SCR 100, SR 94, passing with amendments. [Roll Call] Chair, you have five in favor. Motion is adopted.

Thank you.

Thank you. Moving to SCR 168 and SR 159. The condition's gonna be to move this as is. We'll just acknowledge, I think, the comments from OPSD on this. We can have a conversation.

But being as today is the effective deadline for these, we keep it going. So for the moment, we'll move it along as is. There's no discussion Vice Chair.

Chair's recommendation on SCR 168 and SR 159 to pass unamended with four Members present on the committee. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair. With the absence of Senator DeCorte.

Thank you. Same recommendation for AEN. Any discussion? Chair votes Aye.

SCR 168, SR 159, passing as is of the five Members in attendance. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Chair, you have both passed.

Thank you, Members.

Thank you. Finally, moving on to SCR 133 and SR 125. I was really looking for a good octopus joke to make, but there's just at least eight of them, I don't know, that come to mind. A recommendation of you to move us on as is for further discussion. Okay.

All right. Chair's recommendation on the committee on land, a water, land, culture, and the arts is to pass SCR 133 and SR 125. Okay. I will, the Vice Chair will call for a roll vote. Chair Lee? Okay. Vice Chair goes no on this reservation. [Roll Call] Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

Same recommendation for AEN. Any discussion? [Roll Call]

Yes. Yeah. I'd ask God. With respect to the Chair, I'd ask two Senators that usually hold no to he's with me to vote no on this one. I know it's a rezo, so I'd like to vote yes.

But and I heard all the concerns, But there are a lot of benefits. Number one, being a food source if you look at, the nutrients that it provides. Number two, a lot of people have been coming into, coming out of bay. And if you look at our reefs, they're bus up with people stepping on them. And so if we can grow octopus, maybe our reefs would actually benefit.

I know there's a lot of room. I heard the comments on the other side. But I think this is a little bit well, it's a resolute is asking DLNR to prohibit, and I hate to see that happen this summer. And then I'm not here to change that back next year. So I would then ask you guys to hold more.

So, you know, even though it's just a result. Thanks.

Chair. Oh, go ahead.

Go ahead. Go ahead. Age for beauty.

Can you say that?

I'm having a rough day.

Okay.

Thank you, Senator. You know, one of the things I'm concerned about is food source coming through. And Senator Awa, I don't disagree with you. My intention on this one is to vote with reservations because I am concerned there could be a way with aquaculture as Senator Inouye had talked about. And being a Sorezo, I'm going to vote with reservations because I think there may be a way forward.

And I do want to be able to grow more food for all the things you articulated at. So with that, I'll be going with reservations. Now beauty.

Thank you. Good looking. So Chair, all due respect, you know, I live on an island that has been super sustainable in regards to food. And sometimes we're not so sustainable, which is why when our imports that come to Molokai and we lack barge service or transportation, we turn to the ocean. And this is also to help take care of our kupuna, that can no longer go and feed themselves. You know? Yeah.

It's just a rezow. But with all due respect, I have to go down on this rezow. Thank you.

Okay. Take a roll call vote. Chair votes Aye. On

SCR 133 SR 125, passing as is. [Roll Call]

No. I kinda believe you wanna

know, Carl. My

new friend. Chair.

Your motion did not pass.

Thank you.

So excuse me. I didn't hear your final.

It did not pass.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay. With that, we are adjourned out of our 1:05pm agenda. Excuse me. 1:01PM agenda. Also note for the folks waiting around, we do have one more Just Water Land Committee agenda up next.

Hi. Good afternoon. We're convening the committee on Water, Land, Culture and the Arts on our 1:04PM agenda here in State Capital Conference Room 2 To 4. Today we have one bill, HB 2001, relating to Love My Library Day, which designates the February of each Year as Love My Library Day. Testifying first is the Department of Education.

Hawaii Public Library System. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, and committee Members. Thank you so much for, taking my testimony. As you may know, we are very strongly in support of this wonderful bill.

It's designating the February as I love my library day, which we think is meaningful because it invites our residents to, come together and do something simple, to be, unified and show up for one another and a shared space that's built on knowledge and aloha and an opportunity where everybody, no matter who you are, has an opportunity to read, learn, and connect. Mahalo.

Thank you. Up next on Zoom is Melanie Dukczak.

Aloha. Hi Chair, Vice Chair, and Members of the committee. My name is Melanie Ducsak, and I'm here in support of HB 2001. Libraries are such an important part of our communities here in Hawaii. They're not just places for books.

They provide access to technology, educational support and safe space for people of all ages and backgrounds. I see how valuable it is to have free and accessible spaces like libraries, especially for families who might not have access to those resources elsewhere. So I think designated I Love My Library Day is a really meaningful way to recognize and support the role libraries play in the community. Thank you so much.

Thank you. And finally, Sarah Henson.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, and Members of the committee. My name is Sarah Henson, and I'm a graduate student at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. I am testifying today in strong support of House Bill 2,001. Libraries are one of the few true truly low barrier spaces in our communities. No application, no criteria, no judgment in a diverse state like Hawaii.

Spaces like this matter greatly. While this bill may seem simple, recognition matters. It shapes what we value, what we invest in, and what we choose to sustain. At a time when our libraries are under strain, this kind of recognition is not just symbolic. It is necessary.

I respectfully urge your support and have submitted written testimony for further detail. Mahalo.

Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this bill? Hearing none, are there any questions? Everybody loves a library sounds like.

So with that, I want to go straight into decision making on this one for HB 2001 relating to Love My Library Day. Recommendation that we passing this with amendments. Making this effective, actually, upon approval. Okay, any discussion? Hearing none.

With amendments though, Chair.

With amendments. Okay.

For the Committee on Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts, Chair's recommendation to pass HB 2001 House Draft 2 with amendments. [Roll Call] Measure is adopted. Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much. This sticks is out of our 1:04 agenda. Let's note we have one more with resolutions. Next. Good afternoon.

We're convening the Water, Land, Culture, and Arts Committee on our 1:05pm agenda, here in State Capitol conference from 224 on a number of resolutions. We'll be taking both the Senate Concurrent Resolution and the Senate resolution together at the same time for the purposes of testimony. We'll be asking folks to limit their testimony to one minute to make sure that we have time to get through everybody since there's not a ton of time today. This is our fourth or fifth agenda, I believe.

So thanks, everyone, for your patience.

Up first is SCR 170 and SR 161 supporting the establishment of a sister state relationship with New Zealand to advance biosecurity conservation, protection of endangered species, and other issues of mutual concern. And signed up to testify first is, DLNR.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee. Catherine Stanaway, DLNR, Division of Forestry and Wildlife. DLNR stands on our written testimony and available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next, DBEDT. Saw you itching to get out of the gate there. Thank you. That is everyone who signed up to testify on SCR 100 and seventy and one hundred and sixty one.

Is anyone else wishing to testify? Hearing none, are there any questions? Hearing none. All right. Thank you.

Let's move on to the next set of resolutions. SCR 47 and SR 46 establishing a sister state relationship between the state of Hawaii and prefecture of Okayama, Japan. Testifying first is DBEDT.

Yes. Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, committee Members. DBEDT stands in strong support of this measure. Oh, Okayama is a very, close prefecture to Hawaii. There's a lot of educational exchanges taking place and can take place, and the government of, Okayama has indicated a desire to do so.

Also, the, Okayama Kenjin Kai is a very strong community supporter of this relationship, So it will be very active. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Since he's here, can I ask you a short question?

Sure.

Okay. Don't some of the counties also are have a relationship, county and and the country? Because I thought Big Island or Hilo had a or the County Of Hawaii had a relationship already with Okayama. Do you, would you know?

You know, I'm not too sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

All right. Thank you.

Yes.

Thank you.

So next time when you come up, if there's any sister state relationship, because the county and the countries have their own, you know, relationships. So next time, maybe when you come up and we're adding a new sister state, you can say, well, Sitting County or Honolulu or Maui County or Hawaii County has a relationship as a sister. Thank you. Thanks, Dennis, for all you do as well.

Thanks. That's everyone who had signed up to testify on this these set of resolutions. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Hearing none, any other questions? Hearing none.

Alright. Thank you. Let's move on to the next measure, which is SCR 165 and SR 156 designating the month of March 2026 as March for Water Month in Hawaii. Sign up to testify is Plumbers and Fitters UA local 675. That's everyone who had signed up to testify.

Is there anyone else wishing to testify on these measures? Hearing none. Since there's no one to ask questions of present, thank you everybody. Let's move on to CR 173, which is I'll just note that has the proposed draft convening task force to address event ticket scalping in the state signed up to testify. First is DCCA.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair and Vice Chair and Members. My name is Mana Moriarty. I am the Executive Director at the Office of Consumer Protection. We submitted written testimony requesting an amendment, adding the director of the Office of Consumer Protection as a member of this working group. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thanks very much. Signed up next on this measure is Ticket Policy Forum. Miss Lum.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee. Laurie Lum on behalf of Ticket Policy Forum. Our members include StubHub, SeatGeek, Vivint Seats, TickPick game time, and events ticket center. This resolution focuses solely on resale, which actually represents only a small portion of the ticket ecosystem. Over 90% of the tickets sold are actually on the primary platforms.

Therefore, we are requesting a few amendments. So we want to ensure a more comprehensive balanced evaluation in the task force identifying the drivers of the consumer challenges. We obviously agreed with the previous testifier to include the office of consumer protection as a member, and again, we'd like to expand the task force to the primary market. Right? So it includes the primary as well as the secondary market, and Ticket Policy Forum would be happy to serve as a representative of the secondary market.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Up next is StubHub.

Hello, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee. Tiffany Ajima on behalf of StubHub. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed SD1. We echo the same, comments as a ticket policy forum, and just noting that 90% of the, tickets are sold on the primary market. That resale really only focuses on a small portion of the number of tickets sold, and for that reason, we would also request a seat on the working group if the committee is inclined.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Can I ask

Up next is

And just since she's here Sure? Just to make it fast so we can move on. So, so StubHub is what do you do?

So StubHub is a marketplace for in the secondary market, and it provides a place where buyers and sellers can resell their tickets.

Okay. Alright. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you, Chair.

Yep. Up next is, Rick Bartolini presents.

Aloha, Chair. Oh. Aloha, Chair and Members of the committee. Groups opposing resale price cap bills want you to believe they are protecting consumers from fraud while being funded by the very resale platforms that profit from these practices. They say their platforms provide secure and guaranteed transactions and have warned, and I quote, that fraud risk would significantly increase pushing consumers to the dark web, street corners, and Facebook marketplace.

Yet one day before my Earth, Wind and Fire tickets went on sale last week, more than a thousand tickets were already being sold on StubHub and Vivid seats at markups as high as 800%, even though the sellers did not own them. So while companies in DC while these companies in DCCA warn you about what might happen if resale price cap bill passes, That very conduct is already happening now on the platforms they say they protect consumers from fraud.

If a platform allows tickets to be sold by people who do not even own them, that is not consumer protection. That is the very fraud they say they are trying to prevent. This is exactly why I support the formation of this task force.

Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you very much.

Oh, sorry.

Then, on Zoom, National Independent Venue Association.

Aloha, Chairs and Members of the committee. My name is Kendall Gilvar representing the National Independent Venue Association, which support independently owned and operated venues, promoters, and festivals, including many in Hawaii. Right now, Hawaii fans are being priced out of live entertainment because of professional ticket scalpers. Many primary venue tickets sell out immediately and then instantly reappear on sites like StubHub and Vivid Seats at two, five, even 10 times the face value price. In many cases, these tickets are fraudulent, invalid, or never get delivered to the purchaser.

There were many Hawaii consumers who wrote in about these nightmare ticketing resale experiences for SB 1160, which would reign in these predatory resale practices.

This support made it very clear that constituents across Hawaii are experiencing this issue firsthand and are calling on the legislature to protect them from these practices. Establishing a task force made up of Hawaii legislators, Hawaii venues, Hawaii fans, and Hawaii small businesses to investigate this consumer harm through, SCR 173 is a great first step on behalf of the Hawaii fans and we support this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. As everyone who had signed up to testify in these measures, is there anyone else wishing to testify this afternoon?

Yes. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, committee Members. DBEDT stands on its written testimony that we submitted late in support of this measure. Ticket scalping, especially automated ticket scalping, can be a real problem. Having worked for the Blaisdell Center for several years, I have witnessed this firsthand.

And, it makes it unaffordable for our constituents to, go to these shows because of these high ticket prices and or or they don't go at all. So we urge passage of this resolution. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else on this measure this afternoon? Hearing none, any further questions? Dennis.

Please. Dennis. What happens, I'm one who will buy a ticket If I wanna go to an event and it's sold out, but there's somebody who's not going and the ticket becomes available. I've done that before. I've done that at a football game here, when the pros used to come in.

I've done that in several of our events here at Blaisdell. I don't mind paying if there is a venue, and I wanna hear whether it's Chicago or whoever, I'll stand there and I'll wait. Or we already would have an opportunity because sometimes when I call place out, like, they're saying, well, it's sold out, but there are some people who are not able to attend, but they're not going to sell it at the counter, but there is somebody who will sell.

So what happens to someone who wants to pay for some avenue? That means that, well, this is a working group, which is good because then they can decide what what the report will end up coming to us, for response.

So just, just something that, I would pay and I have been paying, but I'm not paying an extra astronomy I mean, not astronomers, amount of a cost. So

Yeah. This this, resolution doesn't prevent those kinds of activities. It's not for the, individual reseller who may want to resell their individual ticket. It's for automated type of, box or buying a whole bunch.

Buy all these available tickets, then they'll really sell it at a high cost. Okay. Well, that's good. I'm glad we're starting at creating a test force

Yeah. Rather than And we can learn from other jurisdictions.

That, you know, the opportunity. So it's good Good for a task force. Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you. Further questions? Just one from Miss Lum. Thanks. I'm sure this will be part of the discussion as as the potential task force moves forward.

But you noted you had represented a number of different ticket resellers. And then noting what I think one of the other testifiers raised. Last week, tickets went on sale on a number of these sites, including StubHub and Vivid and basically the folks you represent. Hundreds of tickets for hundreds of dollars in Markup. There seems to be, I think, a concern by the public that the both affordability and access to some of those tickets is is a real concern.

Particularly because those tickets went on sale before the actual tickets themselves went on sale. So I guess my question is, how do your clients get those tickets in advance and are able to mark them up so high?

Yeah. I'm not sure if I'm gonna be able to give you a total correct answer for for all, you know, all of the members. I can definitely get back to you, but I do know that on the primary market, they often withhold tickets initially. Right? And then we get only a we're allocated the secondary market is allocated a portion of the tickets from that primary market.

And my understanding I know StubHub is here, so they can just speak for StubHub, not all of our members. But, they don't necessarily, own the ticket inventory to start with. And my understanding is they don't always, so the sellers determine the price of the tickets, and the buyers, basically, like, you would decide what fits your budget. Yeah. Right?

But I understand what you're getting at. Yeah.

So you're selling so you're saying

How do the markups happen? Or or

Well, not so much how do they happen, but how are you able to sell tickets before you own them? I think in your words.

I yeah. I'm I actually don't

That seems kinda concerning, doesn't it?

Yeah. I don't know the answer to that. Sorry. I will get back. I will get back to you. I will definitely get back to you on that.

Okay. Thank you.

Yep. Senator.

Yeah.

Because all these situations are different.

Oh, Mr. Bartolini?

I can

They're called speculative tickets, and they list them on they don't list the specific seat numbers, but they list the section and the row. And, you know, they're not available.

Sure.

So if you're a regular person, you're buying them online on one of the secondary resellers, but there's not an actual ticket associated with that?

I'll give an example. For Carrie Underwood in 2024, a consumer paid $9,000 for four seats in, like, the fifth row. And those were $650.

What state?

Here. Here. At the Blaisdale. And they weren't available. Like, those were the artist seats.

So she got a refund.

So she bought stuff that.

Yeah. I had to write American Express and tell them those seats weren't weren't available to begin with. So that's, like, speculative tickets. Yeah. So Okay.

Thank you. Well, lots of stuff for folks to dive into in the

That's right.

In the conversation. Exactly. Alright. Thanks, everybody. Let's move on, unless there's other questions, to SCR 94 and SR 89 endorsing Waikiki as a world surfing reserve.

And testifying first is the University of Hawaii on Zoom. Good afternoon.

Aloha, Senator Lee and other Members of this committee. Testifying in support of this measure, the College of Social Sciences and the University of Hawaii Sea Grant program are willing to collaborate to support the research and some of the community engagement that may be important in establishing Waikiki as a world surfing reserve. This is really an exciting measure because Waikiki is an iconic cultural and recreational landscape and also take advantage of becoming a World Surf Reserve.

And so we stand in support of this measure and happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

Thank you. Unless everyone who had signed up to testify, is there anyone who's wishing to testify on these measures? Oh, please come forward.

Aloha. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee. My name is Dolan Eversall. I'm here representing Rick Egan with the Waikiki Beach Special Improvement District. I'll stand on our written testimony in support, but just wanted to offer that I am here if you have any questions about the reasons why to create this reserve in Waikiki.

Thank you. Anyone else on these measures?

Hearing none. All right. Thank you. Let's move on to the next set of measures, SCR 99 and SR 93, convening a working group to develop recommendations for supporting arts and culture engagement and related initiatives in the state. And testimony first is DBEDT.

Yes. Hello, Chair, Vice Chair.

Thank you. And that's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there any else wishing to testify this afternoon? Hearing none, are there any questions? Hearing none.

Alright. Thank you. Let's move on to the next set of measures. Oh, sorry. Are there any questions on that?

Let's move on to the next set of measures, SCR 164 and SR 155, prioritizing efforts to protect the white's critical infrastructure of foreign influence. And testifying first is on Zoom, 350 Hawaii. Good afternoon.

Can you hear me?

Yes, please go ahead.

Okay, wonderful. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the committee. My name is Sherry Pollock, and I'm with 350 Hawaii. We stand on our written testimony with strong, very strong support of this resolution and we greatly appreciate you, Senator Lee, for putting this resolution forward. So, Mahalo Nui Loa.

The serious consequences from relying on imports, especially energy and food, is a lesson we all should have learned by now. To build immunity against economic instability, natural disasters, or geopolitical events, we must accelerate efforts to eliminate dependence on imported food, energy, and other commodities and consider the security and resilience of critical infrastructure in all future planning and decision making. If we prioritize community led, renewable and locally available energy and food systems, we can build and achieve lasting resilience.

We owe this to our Keiki and future generations. Please pass and implement this important measure.

And again, Mahalo Nui Lala for putting it forward.

Thank you. Sign up to testify next is Dave Mullenix.

Not present on Zoom, Chair.

K. That's everyone who signed up to testify for these resolutions. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Hearing none, are there any questions?

I have a question, Chair. Are we talking about well, we're it's Well, it does say to protect Hawaii's critical infrastructure from foreign influence. But now I'm Yeah, we're talking about food imports. Is this resolution specifically for any items or in total that includes infrastructure? Why I ask is that we have relationships with counties, and in particular, I'll talk about City and County of Honolulu.

Our Chinatown, the building that is presently owned by Taiwan, and the City and County is asking that Taiwan actually brings their that building up to pretty much a modern type of infrastructure, because the complaints that it's been there for many years needs upgrading. And so and other relationships that counties have, or our state has with regards to anything that's imported. So does this have a point to stop importing all relationships, as well as are we talking about certain items, like maybe all food?

So because we know that many of our food systems comes not only from The US, but from foreign countries. Mexico, we're buying foods that go there.

Did you pose that in the form of a question maybe.

Yeah. So I'm curious who can answer. Dennis.

I'm pointing to you. Well, I'm kinda worried because, you know, we have resolutions before us, and I Ian't vote for something that I feel uncomfortable for, whether it's a bill or a resolution, but I can't help it because Hawaii is we're a mixed population, and and we've had we've had imports from many sources. So Yes. I don't know I'm kinda worried.

Yeah. I don't know what is meant by critical infrastructure. I think that's the key phrase in there. Yeah. As it relates, for instance, to rail, our trains are imported, I believe, from Hitachi.

Is it not? So, you know, is that a critical infrastructure? So, yeah, I Parts.

Yeah. Yeah. And they're doing the work as well.

Yeah.

So Okay. K.

Don't know. Thank you. We'll

We'll move on if that's we'll turn to that discussion, I guess, later on. Up next is SCR 125 and SR 117 requesting DLNR to incorporate into their assessment process for the possession or active seeking of dam liability insurance by private dam owners. Testifying first on SCR 125 is DLNR. Good afternoon. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Jesse Condrea with DLNR engineering division, dam safety. We are here to stand on our written testimony in opposition and are here for to answer any questions.

Thank you. Thank you. So everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this measure? Saw you step forward there for a minute.

Oh, alright. Seeing none. Are there any questions?

DLNR. Okay. And you're engineers, yeah? Okay.

Edwin Matsuda with DLNR engineering division.

Yeah. Okay. I was in the, first discussions years ago with Carly Chang, your, one of your, active, older member as an engineer in DLNR looking at, at Wailua and the, whether the state should be involved with it. But I'm just wondering, how, because we've had bills before about, I think there's some, isn't something in statute already says that anyone in the private sector that has a dam must be reporting something, some actions, or they must upgrade their dams to certain standards?

I remember deliberating on it.

So following the dam failure in 2006

Correct.

There was a dam safety act 2007 that the legislator legislature passed, and that provided a lot of standards that match, align well with the national standards.

Right.

So that's already been established, and I think that's why the department is is opposed to this

I can see that because I think I was Chair of Water, Land that time as well. But it comes to mind that we've dealt with this situation before. Okay, alright. But you folks are against this measure?

It's flawed on many.

It's flawed. It sounds like because there's already something in statute in a sense.

It goes against everything that we have in statute.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

There's no further questions. Let's move on to the last set of measures on the agenda, SCR 104 and SR 98, urging appropriate authorities to redevelop Polyolanes property to preserve its historic architecture, provide recreational, cultural, and community serving uses that benefit the residents. In the area, and testifying first is oh, a and b. You're sitting waiting so patiently there. Yeah.

Thank you. Very last one.

So waiting for you. Thank you. It's nice to see you. Good afternoon, Chair Lee, Vice Chair Inouye, Senator Chang. Thanks for the opportunity. You have our written testimony, so I'll just highlight a few points. So we do respectfully oppose these resolutions because the resolutions actually urge actions that we are already we have already initiated and continue to actually actively advance. About a year and a half ago, we commenced a formal process to evaluate redevelopment opportunities for Pauline Lanes in the property.

And, those preserve the building's historic character to comply with its historic designation. And, you know, also just generally, we do seek to ensure that any of our redevelopments benefit local residents. It's important to note that, in January 2018, A and B announced plans to take back the Pali Lanes property and, shared a concept, which included a gathering space, community area, programming venue, etcetera. But, closure of the bowling center was actively, opposed. So we paused our redevelopment efforts in order to listen A few times.

Oh, shoot. I'm done. Okay.

I'm sure we can arrange for a question. Okay. But that said, as everyone was trying to testify on this measure, is there anyone else wishing to testify with us? Hearing none, are there any questions?

I'm sorry. Introduction again. Are you with a

I'm Dana with Alexander in Baldwin.

With

the and b.

With Alexander in Baldwin. Sorry.

Good to see you here.

Yeah. Nice to see you too. Any other questions?

Further questions? Just one following up, and we can take this conversation offline Sure. Later on.

Happy to.

But the timeline that you're working on

Yep.

For the record, for this particular property, which has been the center of a whole bunch of discussions as you're well aware, What does that look like right now?

So, I mean, development is challenging. Things take a very long time. What is, delaying this in particular is the extraordinary expense related to the historic designation. So we are required to keep much of the historic characteristics, and we're already working on understanding exactly what we need. So that's what's taking a long time.

We would like to develop this property and hope to put something out before the end of the year. Again, we commenced the process of trenching, understanding what's underneath and what we can do. So I would say we started about eighteen months ago. I'd like to be able to save something by the end of the year. That's a goal of ours.

We can't make promises, but we really want to improve this property. It is right in the center of the rest of our properties. Neighboring tenants, the community wants it. We want it to. It makes no sense for us to hold on to this property and pay for it to sit dormant.

Would those uses align with what's been voiced repeatedly by the community for Well purpose and

I took too long to speak, but we my testimony notes how much time we spent trying to preserve bowling, listening to the community, understanding that they wanted to keep some type of bowling or family entertainment. So we spent a lot of time on that. That is not feasible. There is no interest by bowling operators, experienced bowling operators. But, yeah, I would say anything we try to do, we would want the community to appreciate and support because this is it's what we do.

We're in the business of providing goods and services experiences for the community, for residents. So

Okay. We'll follow-up, later on, sounds like.

Stay in touch.

Well, it's challenging too because there are laws with regards to SHPD and what is the historic preservation

Exactly.

In the architect of buildings and whatever structure you have. And it depends now if we're talking about an area of only that building, or we're talking about the region in itself, the entire property that ANB is involved? I mean, I've seen it on television about the wishes of the community, but it's challenging times, but it's something too, if you look at Shipton, what's the historic, and this is talking about mid century architecture.

I mean, it's big bucks that your architects gotta pay to come up with what, what is available and the cost benefit and and the rules and the policies that you gotta deal with. Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate the opportunity.

Thank you very much. Okay. That takes us to the end of our last agenda for the day. Last agenda for the day we're gonna take a quick recess and once we get our folks back we'll come back for decision making recess

Good afternoon. We're convening reconvening the committee on water, land, culture, and the arts on our 1:05pm agenda on a number of resolutions that we had previously heard. First is SCR 170 and SR 161 supporting the establishment of sister state relationship with New Zealand. Recommendation is to pass with amendments, making a few changes, including changing the references to New Zealand to Aotearoa New Zealand. Secondly adopting the DLNR and DBEDT recommendations which will establish a partnership rather than a sister state, relationship.

All right.

So any discussion or questions? Hearing none. Vice Chair.

Chair's recommendation on SCR 170 and SR 161 to pass with amendments. Okay. Chair Lee. Aye. Vice Chair goes up.

[Roll Call] Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Moving on to SCR 47 and SR 46, establishing sister state relationship between Hawaii and prefecture of Okoyama, Japan. Recognition is to move along as is. There's no discussion.

Okay. Chair's recommendation on SCR 47 and SR 46 to pass unamended with four members present, one excused. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you. Moving on to SCR 165. I'm sorry.

Yes. SCR 165 and SR 156 designating the month of March 2026 as March for water month. Recognition is to pass with amendments, but we'll just change the measure to read designating the month of March as March for water month in Hawaii, removing the 2026 since that was last month. So there's no discussion. Vice chair.

Chair's recommendation on SCR 165 and SR 156 to pass with amendments with four Members. With three Members present, any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Moving on to SCR 173. This is the proposed draft convening a task force to address event tickets scalping. Recommendations move this with amendments, so adopting the base proposed draft, and then also making a couple amendments, noting a couple of the testifiers' testimony. We wanna take that into account.

So we'll amend it to have the task force do a first report identifying public problems and kind of defining situation as identified by Hawaii residents and stakeholders. Secondly, we'll report, of a second, engagement, report looking at, other states and jurisdictions on the regulatory solutions where our government partners, including OCP and, DBEDT and other agencies in other places. We'll take a look at what's been done, what's successful. And finally, we'll have final engagement with our industry, folks who would wait in in the secondary resell market.

And then finally we'll amend the task force composition also to include or to clarify.

Also include Hawaii artists performers representatives of various stakeholders. And note in there as we go through these sort of three conversations engaging with different partners, we'll have respective parties engaged, whether it's OCPE or other stakeholders and whatnot.

So that'll be a fun discussion for whoever's involved later on. If there's no further questions, vice chair.

It chairs recommendation on SCR 173 to pass with amendments with three Members present. Oh, anyone speaking anyone voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. We'll Moving on to SCR 94 and SR 89 endorsing White Key as a boat surfing reserve. Conditions to pass as is. There's no discussion, Vice Chair.

Okay. Chair's recommendation on SCR 94 and SR 89 to pass, unamended with four members present. Anyone voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. We're going to SR 90 SCR 99 and SR 93, which is a working group to, work on arts and culture engagement related initiatives. Recommend passing some amendments, amending the title text to reestablish a nonprofit organization, amending the chairs for the different SCR and SR accordingly to co chairs for the SCR versus just Senate chair for the SR. We'll also ask for a collaboration with other similar organizations.

Thank you. The chair's recommendation on SCR 99 and SR 93 to pass with amendments with five, with five members present. Any voting with reservations? Any no votes? Measure is adopted, Mr.

Thank you. Moving on to SCR 164 and SR 155, prioritizing efforts to protect Hawaii's infrastructure from, foreign influence. I recommend passing these amendments. I'm just noting some of the discussion will cite specifically some of the impacts of foreign influence on Hawaii, for example, right now, noting the Iran War and what that's doing to volatility and costs for gas and energy, for example. Also, some of the food issues when we have disasters and lack thereof.

Chair.

Also, add in Department of AG and Biosecurity for that food dependence piece of it and make stylistic and tech changes. Hopefully, we can be a little more resilient down the road.

Chair? Yes. Chair's recommendation on SCR 164 and SR 155 to pass with amendments. [Roll Call] Measure is adopted, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. And finally, for SCR125 and SR117. This is the dam liability insurance. I'm noting concerns raised by the department as well as the testifiers will defer this measure. And finally on SCR 104 and SR 98, we'll take that conversation offline with the various stakeholders.

So we'll defer this measure as well, or these measures, I should say. And with that, we are adjourned. Thanks, everybody.