House Standing Committee on Public Safety

Good morning. Convening our committee on public safety. Today is Wednesday, 04/15/2026, 10:30AM. We are in Conference Room 411. This is very likely members, our last committee hearing for the 2026 legislative session.

Of course, we'll have more conference committee meetings, but no committee hearings. I will say that we are planning at Kona low informational briefing for Monday. My staff is working on that, and I believe we have an afternoon time slot. So we're working with that. Please be on the lookout for that.

But with that said, today will be our, likely, our last committee, hearing for, measures, and it will be my last hearing, for measures as well. So very happy to be here, in this capacity serving as your Chair for this committee on public safety. So on that note, let's get started. Starting off with SCR54 requesting the fire marshal to appoint a hydrogen fire safety expert and provide training on hydrogen remediation safety protocols. Members, it does not appear that we have any testimony for this.

Any questions or comments? Okay. Moving on to SCR59, which is also, requesting the excuse me, members. Requesting the governor to establish procedures to authorize certain health care professionals to engage in the practice of the respective profession in the state without a wholly issued license during a state of emergency.

Members, we don't have any testimony on this, but it's any questions here?

Comments? Yeah.

The questions too. Can I ask you?

Comments? Yeah. Questions or comments? We can do this now.

Well, yeah. No. I was wondering how, was that an issue in previous, emergencies? Again, when the governor declared a state of emergency, for instance, during COVID, during the fires, there were there were medical professionals waiting to offer services, but they couldn't because there was this missing?

Yes. Thank you. That's a really good question Vice Chair. And, yes, there was a situation where we're looking to ensure that pharmacists could practice to dispense medications that might be needed in times of emergency. We were looking at mental health professionals being needed to serve people in the Lahaina wildfires.

So this is precisely a resolution in response to that kind of situation. And we had, I think, taken up laws in the past that had also looked at kind of how we could do some expedited approvals in the context of an emergency. And so I think that's what this is following up of on. So I'm comfortable as we talk about this and as it moves on, the health committee can take take up the matters on this.

But this is actually something that is very much kind of, something that public safety and health committees have been concerned about in the past.

I have a question.

Yes.

The thought was when they talk about, getting approval and search, you know, people applying and getting approved is do we have or could we have a preapproved list that's, you know, just all of this information is done ahead of time so that the available people are there and they don't have to go through this timing thing of, you know, immediate response and stuff.

And, you know, of course, their expiration date would have to be amended so that it could be followed up on and updated. So we have this list of resources.

I think that's what the resolution is calling for when it says, maintain an online registry of professionals practicing under emergency procedures. I think that's precisely it. And I think it would be interesting to know if, in fact, if there are kind of a cohort professionals, that are being deployed in regions where states are collocated. Right? And so oftentimes, we have to bring in firefighters or other first line responders.

I wonder if there's a similar kind of thing that could be developing along that edge. So I think, along those lines for medical health professionals, because we are seeing more and more of the needs for, health professionals on the ground in response to emergencies. So, again, with that said, even though we don't have testimony, I think these questions and these thoughts are good and can be explored if we were to move this along to the next committee, which is health. Alright. Okay, members.

Let's take up SCR62 SD1 requesting the 911 board to establish or utilize an appropriate working group to engage with the disability community to address continuing access issues in the state's emergency and 911 responses. Okay, members. We have testimony in this instance, from, State Council on Developmental Disabilities. Administrator Bartoldus told us that communicating with us that she would not be here, but she is she may be on on Zoom. Yes.

Oh, great. Wonderful. In support. Go ahead.

Thank you, Chair, committee members. And I'm sorry I'm not there in person being this is your last 1 and Okay. I won't go there, but thank you so much for everything you've done. Yeah. So our testimonies, we usually try to keep it 1 page, but we really put a lot more into it because we're very appreciative.

Quite honestly, I was very afraid when this Bill turned into a rezzle because it's just a rezzle, but it's really been impactful. We've already attended 2 911 Board Meetings. They're very engaging. They wanna hear from our disability community. And so thank you for this, and we really wanna keep this rezal going.

However, we are asking for, a little bit more to this rezal. We really need an integrated, system with EMS infrastructure so that both the dispatchers and EMS field personnel have real time access. We really need to educate the public on the integration. I must say about 2 weeks ago, we had individuals signing up for Smart 911 thinking it was a integrated system. We we thought it was working on Oahu and in parts of Maui.

But if it hadn't been for the EMS chief who just told us, you guys, this system is not. It no longer works on the phone. We're not using it. And we're like, what? We had no idea.

So here, we're promoting, saying, hey. This is the integrated system we want. It has the access and functionally things we need, and we understand there might be another system similar to Smart 1 1, but we didn't even realize that Smart 1 1 was stopped being used on Oahu and on Maui. So we think it's very important and valuable to have the Department of Health EMS included on the working group and to make sure it's an integrated system so, they could get real time information.

I hope that made sense, and thank you so much for this opportunity to testify and for your support on this.

Okay. Can you please hold there for a minute? Because I think we're gonna have questions for you. Thank you. We have testimony in support from Disability and Communication Access Board, Cath Christine Pagano.

Testimony in support from State of Hawaii 911 Board Royce Masanobu Murakami. In support, Lou Ertushek from Hawaii Disability Rights Center. In support, Malia Johnson. Okay. Anyone else in the room to testify?

Anyone on Zoom? Members questions?

I have a question.

Go ahead. The representative Shimizu.

You mentioned the smart 11, and I'm sorry. I'm not is that can you, explain that a little bit?

Oh, absolutely. So, gosh, probably 10 years ago, the Senate passed a Bill and actually, I don't know if they passed a Bill, but they're very strong supporters of Smart 1 1 to sign up for it. It's a format that you can put your information on, especially access and functional needs. So you could put your phone number and address. You could put different types of addresses depending on where you're at.

So when you call, your information is there. And so the dispatcher would be able to see it immediately and say, hey. Is this Daintry? Are you calling about yourself, your mom, or your dad? My dad.

Oh, is this what's happening? So they can ask you some questions versus you in a panic situation trying to articulate what's going on, what's happening, and those sort of things. They have that information at the forefront. And it was a very it is or was. I'm sorry.

It was a very good system. So we have been promoting it. We didn't realize that they no longer use that on Oahu. And here when we came in, we're talking to people about it, and it was, I don't know mislead no. I shouldn't say misleading, but it was something that we did not realize wasn't taking place.

And so when we found out, the different systems that were being used, what was being supported, we found it was lacking. It didn't have the necessary access and functional needs that our vulnerable population really needs to put in onto a platform. Then we also found out that it wasn't an integrated system, which it can be. So we really wanna work on that.

Was that a culty thing? I'm sorry to interrupt you, but

Yes. No. Please do. Yes. I get nervous if I round or not round, but I talk really fast.

So thank you for slowing me down. It is county to county. And so we want something that's statewide that every county uses that's the same because we have people going sometimes working on Oahu and they, but they live in Alanae. And so we have people, living one island, working in another. So we really felt a statewide, system would be best.

And so that's why we wanted to.

So this is not on your testimony. Yeah. So would you be able to, write up something and send it to our committee?

Yes. I should. And I apologize that, I should have put it in our testimony and i apologize. I did not get that in there, but I definitely will. Thank you.

Thank you for being here. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Miss Bartoldis, I have a couple of questions. So to improve this SCR, we need to insert into the further final be it resolved clause that this be transmitted to the director of the Department of Health and who in EMS? The administrator for EMS statewide?

Yes. Or yes. The administrator statewide or designee or designee, but yes.

Okay. That is just who the resolution is directed towards.

Oh, did I misread something? I'm sorry. Maybe I brought up a older one. I apologize.

Well, no. So in SCR62, there is actually no indication of who is convened to be part of this working group. And but I would like to capture your recommendation that they need to ensure that this is something integrate this is a a pro a working group that integrates I need you to repeat it, but it integrate it needs to ensure that the system is integrated with, EMS and what is what is it what's what are the two things being integrated? Well, no. So in SCR 62, there is actually no indication of who is convened to be part of this working group. And But I would like to capture your recommendation that they need to ensure that this is something integrate this is a a pro a working group that integrates I need you to repeat it, but it integrate it needs to ensure that the system is integrated with, EMS and what is what is it what's what are the two things being integrated?

Or the elements being integrated?

Thank you. To have the integration of the system with EMS infrastructure, so both the dispatcher and the EMS field personnel have real time access. And the second 1 is to make sure we educate the public about this.

So you want an educational component into the task and the functions of what the working group is doing?

Please, Chair. Thank you.

Okay. We will work with that language. And just to clarify, in the previous system, was the EMS infrastructure integrated so that dispatchers were communicating with the EMS professionals on the ground?

That's what we understood it to be, Chair.

But now it has actually fallen away from that. Correct. Even on

Oahu. No longer.

Even on Oahu.

A couple of years. Even on Oahu, even on Maui where it was.

K. That is a loss actually then. It's actually a significant loss in the system. Okay. I agree.

Thank you. Thank you for bringing us, to our attention and to informing the committee because this is, I think, information new to the committee.

Yeah. It's great. Yeah.

Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, and thank you for joining us, via Zoom.

Thank you. Best of luck

Moving on, we have SCR179 urging the county Of Maui to enforce the provisions of the fire code of the county of Maui relating fire hazards, Brush Brush clearance, fuel breaks, roadside vegetation clearing, and emergency access. Members, again, no testimony on this, but it is continuing to raise important issues. Any discussion?

Seeing none, moving on to SCR74, requesting the auditor to conduct an audit of no bid contracts issued by state and county agencies under proclamations declaring states of emergency during a 6 year period between 01/01/2020 and 12/31/2025.

We have late testimony, members from, I believe, of representative Cochran. Is that it? Yes. SCR74. I can speak?

Yes.

Do we have that testimony in front of us?

Oh, thank you. Okay.

Did you submit a pretty Yes.

That's good. Yes. Yes.

I have it in my notes. The late testimony.

I see.

But so it yeah. So I won't go into it, but I am basically here in very strong support of this, Senate Concurrent Resolution and especially the because of the fact of the duration, from 01/01/2020 to 12/31/2025 because the 08/08/2023 wildfire worse than the nation occurred in Lahaina. Something that I literally was in, you know, grateful to have survived and so and continue to live the experience of it.

And so jumping to my, concerns in reference to proclamations, that the governor has declared and thus have, bypassed procurement codes, has bypassed the bidding processes and things. I look at 1 particular, 1 particular project that was built expeditiously, which is good.

You know, it was during the time of crisis we needed housing for our fire survivors which had had nowhere to go. So they bypass a lot of things. Is the project. 186,000,000 has been given to that project. And during the bidding, I guess, lack of a bidding process, there was 1 company that was hired to be project manager, unlicensed in the state.

Looked it up. Have no follow-up from DCCA because it's been a concern of mine. And then also the units, the housing units, company that distributes them, that install them, that build them are is also unlicensed. So with that being said, unlicensed, unqualified, company to install these units that people currently live in have are faulty. They have not been built to codes, to specs, to, ADA compliance, and what have you.

With this past Kona storm, prod units have been leaking. People have fell through the floor. Because units were put in backwards, sewer flows instead of away from the unit. It flows into the unit. People have had to put, towels on the drains to keep up the smells in sewer.

I asked DOH to have air quality testing. That has gone unanswered. So the list goes on and on as in I believe it starts from the very beginning when through the lack of procurement code and oversight, you know, unqualified, unlicensed people were hired to basically do the project and the job. And at the end of the day, detention basins were built inadequately. Just this past Kona storm, they overflowed.

The residents below had to be evacuated, and these are homes and properties that were damaged by fire. This type of situation, extremely triggering. We have all been traumatized and continue to be traumatized, And with these triggers, it is just it's hard to live through it again and again. And so I my testimony does highlight four deaths in this project, a fire also, and I have yet to receive any police reports.

I have yet I have had yet to get follow-up from Maui Fire Department because they're deeming the state project a private residence.

And, anyhow, I won't go any further into that. I think lastly, this particular, because this is all under Department of Human Services, and they currently are under audit by this by the state legislature from last year and a completed audit of the department, in particular, the division of Statewide Office of Homelessness and housing, SHOSS, has not been completed.

It was supposed to be given to us no later than 20 days before the opening of session, and this resolution also states that be it resolved. So I'm trying to figure out where's the hammer, teeth, or something that forces an auditor, whatever you have at the time, whether completed or not, give us something. Give us what you have.

Give the body something or whatever what have you found so far, basically? Because currently, this the people being audited, and I have it in there is an email stating they can't complete it because the auditees are not forthcoming with information, so they can't complete the audit. But my biggest problem is that this particular entity is asking for funding through the state legislature currently. As I speak, Bill of

Alright.

A third union Bill got passed yesterday. So anyways so that's kinda, it real briefly. There's issues, I think, and the procurement quotes should not be waived and, you know, also health and safety of the community even during emergency proclamations cannot be, jeopardized, by just to be expeditious, I think is my.

Representative Cochran, if you can just stay there because I think there might be questions. Anyone else in the room to testify? Anyone on Zoom to testify? Members, I'm opening up for questions. Go ahead, representative.

Thank you, representative Cochran, for championing this this issue, and I would share your frustration. I would love to partner with you to follow-up on those concerns. Do you know who is the lead department or point of contact that would be the appropriate person to follow?

I think would be first the the top would be director Yamane of Department of Housing

DHS. Yeah.

DHS. And then below that, I believe what has been the main, person to spearhead this particular project I'm speaking of is Joe Campos, deputy director Joe Campos. So those are the top 2, from the depart from DHS.

K. Thank thank you. Making sure.

Okay. I have another question. Looking at the, content of SCR74 And if this continues to move on and I have to be frank, I haven't looked at the testimony that was provided before the Senate. So I'm curious.

There is a whereas clause in here that says whereas the terms of search in public contracts entered into between the National Kidney Foundation of Hawaii and the City and County of Honolulu and other agencies during the coronavirus have raised questions regarding the use of public monies during states of emergency.

Were you the author of this, in connection with Senator Moriwaki? Not at all. I wish. Okay. Because that is actually, directly related to, I guess, investigations related to, Representative Cullen, and the, potential criminal investigations around a contract.

And so, do you have any thoughts on if what we're asking the auditor to do is going to interfere with potential criminal investigations that we don't that may or may not be ongoing, we don't know, how do we handle that?

Personally, I don't believe so. I mean, I think at this point, the the legislature has every purview and right to question our the use of our public funds, our taxpayer dollars. So what they do or whoever, wherever, I feel like personally, where I live and and the people I bump into every day who's living in fear and and jeopardy for, you know, health and safety, well-being, I think we have every right to find out how did this happen.

And I'm not disagreeing with I guess I'm not disagreeing with you, but I'm hearing the content of what your testimony is, which I think falls under this because it falls under the time frame That this resolution is looking at, which is 01/01/2020, which is predating the pandemic. And then the wildfires were on what date? 2023, August, dates 2023. So it falls into Yeah.

Because the timing of this resolution goes and it actually spans all of the COVID pandemic in inclusive of the wildfires, that what this audit is actually looking to do is to really look at a broad spectrum of potential contracts, but you're not necessarily your concern has been the the the more recent ones.

I mean, I can go back, but I think if I kinda, like, pick my battles and focus on 1 thing that's affecting me directly today, it would be contracts having to do with anything, really. I mean, if I wanna go generally, with having to do with the Ohio wildfire, really. Yeah. And I'm talking, yeah, contracts with nonprofits. I mean, the list goes on and on.

But again, if I need to just whittle it down to one pointed focus, this is really huge, I believe, on behalf of all of us and especially our taxpayer dollars and proper use of money.

But then you're not also opposed to us going beyond the Maui wildfires and going back into the contracts under the COVID? Totally not.

That then maybe Because I believe some of those funds may have been mingled here. But, again, I just need Okay. You know, speculating.

Okay. Well, thank you. Thank you for shedding light on this, and I appreciate that the Senate has sent us over. I know. Sometimes resolutions can be quiet and contain bombs, and maybe this contains a bomb.

Thank you. And thank you for, representative Shimizu for giving heads up, and that's why I'm here today to share with you. So No.

Thank you.

Thank you, folks, for your time, and congratulations, rep Baladi, for all the work, and, good luck and prayers and blessings for your for future endeavors.

Thank you, representative. Alright. Let's move on to SCR28 SD 1 requesting the Department of Defense to convene a working group to develop recommendations for State of Hawaii commemorative Vietnam Veterans Medal. This has no cocoa bombs in it. This 1, we have testimony in support, I believe, from DOD, Chair general, Neil Mitsuyoshi.

Thank you for joining us.

Hello, Chair Belatti, Vice Chair Iwamoto, members of the committee, brigadier general retired Neil Mitsuyoshi with the Department of Defense. The department stands on his testimony in support of this measure. There are no bombs in it. And we're prepared to answer any questions you may have. And and representative, I just wanna thank you for your service and best of luck.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Any other testifiers in the room? Any testifiers via Zoom? Members, any questions?

I have a question. Why can't you just move forward with the new working group?

So we've been talking with Senator Fukunaga and Representative Lee. And I think the intent of this resolution is to do the legwork so that, an appropriation can be requested in the subsequent legislative session to purchase the medals, and actually implement the distribution of the medals to the veterans. So I think that's the intent is really to, figure out what's this gonna cost.

And, and not only that, I think the other concern is the purpose of the state, commemorative medal is to award residents or members of Hawaii who participated in that conflict as other states have done in the nation. And that's a very challenging thing to figure out what are the eligibility requirements.

It's not that simple. So we have to figure out what the most efficient way is to identify those people, and create a system so that they can even apply if they aren't identified, upfront. So to ensure that we get the most amount of people that are eligible for the award to receive it.

And also I can imagine without it triggering, because for some it was very traumatic and they're still dealing with PTSD and to be pulled back in.

Yeah. I think the other reason why a lot of states have, tried to establish a commemorative award is because, unlike most of our service members that come back from combat that are honored, and celebrated, that particular conflict was, less than what others have received.

Thank you.

I'll just if you can stay there, in general, I think I really appreciate this because I think for our generation that's living, we have so many folks who have experienced the Vietnam conflict. And so when I see in this, resolution things like the wall that heals, That was an amazing tribute that was brought here to the islands and that was done by a Vietnam veteran. And I think that we have a rich and deep, community here that can rally around, this particular project.

So, resolution is a good organizing mechanism because it gives it a sense of formality and direction so that we all can actually be moving in on a in the same direction on an issue that is sometimes very difficult to talk about for historical reasons. And so with that, I really appreciate that you, have offered this up and are willing to work on this.

That's just my comment. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Thank you for your time. Okay.

Any other discussion, comments or questions? Okay. Seeing none, let's move to SCR60 SD 1 requesting the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to provide an update on the findings of the proof of concept study titled break breaking cycles, alternative models of rehabilitation and restorative justice on Oahu. We have first up testimony from the director of DCR.

Thank you. Good morning to the Vice chairman of the committee. I'm Tommy Johnson, director of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. I'll just summarize our testimony. We support the intent of this.

We would ask that the measure be amended that, the quarterly briefings, update briefings be annually, because of the complexity of the O triple C project, there's really not gonna be a lot to report on a quarterly basis. So we request that the annual other than that, we'll deal with the resolution and provide you.

Okay. We have thank you. Thank you, director. We have testimony in support from Kristin Johnson, Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Kristin Johnson. I'm the oversight coordinator of the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission. We stand in support of this SCR. The breaking cycle study was a massive, massive project that was completed.

And I think for the commission, it's important to make sure that work continues and follow us through. And so we appreciate the transparency that this resolution provides. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. We have testimony in support from, ACLU of Hawaii. Testimony in support by, Bob Merce, Chair of the correctional reform working group.

Thank you, Chair Galate, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Bob Merce, and I am the Chairman of the correctional reform working group. We support this resolution. It's really connected to send a Concurrent Resolution 89. I think the 2 go together.

One calls for a group of people to community advocates to join in and help implement the some of the findings of the breaking cycles report. And this basically calls for a different thing, which is to find out if the changes that we need to have are really happening. So we think this is a great example of creating transparency and be a real asset over the long run to make sure that the hard work that everybody put into the breeding, cycle study, are really implemented.

Thank you.

Okay. Can we move to test I believe there's testimony and support from Kat Brady Community Alliance on Prisons. Not present. Okay. Okay.

Members, comments, questions? Any questions?

I have a question.

Go ahead.

You know, obviously, that this previous study and a report was, was given out in this resolution is trying to continue that work. So, short of this resolution, has there been an ongoing effort to continue the work that that report initiated?

Yeah. Thanks, thanks for that question. So, so, transparently, when it comes to that report specifically, the commission hasn't seen specific efforts from the department to incorporate that into the jail planning. I will say that the department has sent the commission kind of a two-page overview of parts of the report that they would like to implement into jail planning. And I know that a lot of it is based on funding.

And as Director Johnson said, you know, this all takes a lot of time. But, yeah, the, the commission is concerned that as far as, like, system-based thinking and system-wide thinking, we're not sure that that's really a part of the current planning. It's more focused on infrastructure.

So, you, you think this reso would force that to happen?

Well, I think it can help. I think it adds accountability, you know, when people are asked very directly to report out on what they're doing about, you know, a certain thing. I think it adds a little bit pressure to make sure that that report is thorough and comprehensive and complete. So, the commission's hope that it would it would make a difference.

I know that when the commission in the past has reported on different issues, it has definitely made a difference just bringing it to the public or bringing it to the legislature.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that. Thank you for being here. Thank you, director Johnson. Thank you, chair.

Thank you. Director, because Ms. Brady is not here, can I ask you a question? So, her testimony is really calling out that there'd be specific kind of written responses and explanations. And I think there's sometimes a dissatisfaction that some of our oral briefings, there's a lot said, but there's not maybe follow-up. And I'm asking this question to you, and it really should be directed to her.

But do you feel that the language already in this reso already says that you should provide a written report as well as an oral update? Or would you be opposed to us making it a very explicit that, like, we need very concrete explanations about what the department is doing to implement the recommendations of the breaking cycles?

Well, I think if you take a look at the next item of a, attached to our testimony on SCR 89, that's a, that, those are the two-page principal summaries we took from the report that we're gonna apply specifically to OCCC. That was also provided to our, to DAGs and to the consultants, for the planning and designing process for OCCC.

So, my main concern with this particular resolution is the reporting requirements are so stringent and to do it quarterly would be burdensome for us. And because of the complexity of the project itself because it's typically talks about Oahu, then nothing's gonna happen on a quarterly basis where you're gonna see huge chunks of changes every three months. It just doesn't work that way.

So, we would ask that it'd be amended to allow us to do it the, the reporting out and we can do it on a public forum. And then, we can set up a public briefing for anybody to come and listen to what we have to say because that's what it calls for. All we're saying is we don't disagree with the pointing out, but every three months is not gonna make sense.

Okay. Well, I think, okay. I, I understand that you, you don't think it's, it, it can be met, and that might not be my much progress, but I think the frustration is that there seems to be no progress, and that, that's the problem. And we, we don't we don't have to go back and forth on it now.

But I think that's what the frustration is, and that's why the Senate sent this over with a quarterly, and I'm actually not inclined to change it because I wanna really understand perhaps, how these two resos are interacting, as well as I know you had a really important briefing that happened with the Senate on Monday, which I haven't been able to review yet.

So, there's a lot of interest in making sure the department is actually delivering on what it's saying it's doing, in all of the facilities that it, it, it operates in order so that we can, in fact, do some of the, at the end of the day, bring back some of the prisoners that we don't have right now here on the island.

Yeah. I think the, if I might, was expected bringing the prisoners back. We're getting mixed, mixed messages from the legislature. Let me explain. On one hand, the legislature says bring inmates back.

On the other hand, the legislature passed Act 292, which requires us to create different housing units in Halawa, our only medium security prison, we don't have room for, so, we end up, in order to comply with the law now that goes into effect on July, we have to send additional inmates to the Mainland to create those special housing units that we need to move the population around. So, we're kind of in a catch 22.

So, we support bringing all the inmates back, don't get me wrong, I know this is off the subject some, but we simply don't have the space because we have one medium security male prison. That's all.

Okay. And for the people in the public who are listening, the Act 292 is a restrictive housing working group. And so, that's another measure that's moving to make sure that the conditions in the prisons are actually humane, and, and not so overly restrictive. That's another issue. But I think we might have differences of opinion about how some of those restrictive housing requirements can be met.

That, that's not requiring you to have to build more facilities, I think. But let's have that discussion in the proper context and let's just keep moving along with these resolutions. So, with respect to SCR 89, any other questions for this? This is the breaking alternative models, the breaking cycles report.

Can I just?

Yeah. Go ahead.

I don't envy your job by any means, and I, I would respect the, the position that you carry. I, I think it's, and I, I appreciate your, your comment as far as the mixed signals. You're, you're trying to balance conflicting goals sometimes. But I think what is important for us as the Legislature and for, for me personally is to understand the limitations that you're faced with and communicate that as clearly to us, versus a lack of effort.

And, and, you know, we, we, we, we don't want to misunderstand, you know, or, or misinterpret results not happening.

You understand what I'm saying? So, I, I think it's really important to, as, as clearly and as powerfully as you can state, what is, what, what, what are the physical or monetary challenges that prevent you from doing something, so that it's not misinterpreted as lack of effort, or what are the challenges that we can, as a Legislature and a department, work together to achieve here.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, director. Okay. Let's move on to SCR 89, SD 1. Okay. So, whereas the SCR 60 was looking at requesting the Department of Corrections to provide an update, SCR 89 focuses and asked the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission to establish an advisory committee to develop recommendations on the implementation of the alternative models for rehabilitated—rehabilitation and restorative justice on a wall, of which, I'm reading after that, was what the breaking cycles was a study about.

Right? Okay. So, now, this is asking, again, just to clarify the oversight commission to establish an advisory committee to develop recommendations on implementation of alternative models for rehabilitation and restorative justice on Oahu. We have first up testimony from Director again, Department of Corrections and.

Thank you, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. I'm Tommy Johnson, Director of Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. I'll summarize our testimony. It's fairly short. We support the intensiveness measure, and it's our goal to build a regional military facility in OCCC and, and any new facility for that matter.

But we are concerned that any delay in the, in the building of the, in the building of the project would cost additional funding. As an example in our testimony you'll see, in 2017, when the project was ready to go, it was about 537,000,000 estimated cost. Now it's over 900,000,000 because every month, there's a 4 to 6,000,000 escalation cost. So, we support the intent. We're willing to talk to the stakeholders, meet with the folks at the that the Oversight Commission put together and the working group.

We provided with our testimony the two pages of principles that we took from the critical type of report that we're gonna specifically apply to the OCCC facility. And again, this was provided to DAGS and our consultants and the architects for the part. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. We have testimony in support from, Ms. Johnson, Oversight Coordinator.

Chair, vice chair, members of the committee. My name is Kristen Johnson. I'm the Oversight Coordinator with the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission. We support this SCR, and we really appreciate the legislature's trust in the Oversight Commission to lead this effort. The one thing I do wanna say is that we will be asking for more staff this year.

This, this will be a pretty big lift for us. We're a pretty small office. And so, we just hope that the legislature supports us and make our team bigger. Thank you so much.

Okay. Thank you. Testimony in support from the Office of Hawaiian affairs. Testimony in support from ACLU of Hawaii. Testimony in support from Imua Alliance.

Testimony in support from Mr. Merce, Correctional Reform Working Group.

Thank you, Chair Belatti, Vice Chair Iwamoto, members of the committee. Again, my name is Bob Merce. I'm with the—Chair of the Correctional Forum Working Group. We came together in 2023. It's mostly a group of lawyers and, and one forensic psychiatrist who's worked in the, in the jail, out of our deep concern that the whole jail project was heading in the wrong direction. And we, we spent a year basically working very hard to study all the plans that we could find on the best practices in jail planning and design.

We wrote a paper then called "Getting It Right: Recommended—Recommendations—and Action Plan for a Better Jail." We're happy to say that that was endorsed by the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Committee, by the UPW, the union that represents the correctional workers, by Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction, Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, and many organizations in the community.

We really believe—we've also worked with Cathy Hoshar and the, the University of Hawaii Community Design Center and tried to support them in every way that we, we could, including conducting this, a two-day symposium.

We were, we were a joint sponsor of that, and over 80 organizations from the community participated and, and came with an overflow crowd because of the really deep concern in the community about this jail and what it's going to be and what it's gonna look like and what it's going to do. And those are the, the major, major things that we're concerned with.

So, we were really—we always knew that Kathy Hoshar and her team were on the right track, and they were going to, she was going to come up with something really good. We had no idea it was gonna be as good as it really is. This is a masterful of report. It's the best that I have ever seen for the pre, predesigned planning, for a new jail. It, it, it, and she involved over 120 organizations, talk story session.

She went out and talked to prisoners. She went to halfway houses. She went to—she, she reached almost all of the stakeholders that you can imagine to come up with this report, and that's why we think it's important. And, unfortunately, we're really supportive of having an advisory committee because of why, frankly, we have a very bad history of having good reports that sit on shelves and accumulate a lot of dust.

And this resolution is really unique in that it would create an advisory committee or stakeholders to participate and then try and make sure that the great ideas that are contained contained in this, this study get into the actual planning of of the new jail.

We've heard a lot. I've been—attended a lot of presentations by the state on what the new jail is going to be. And all we hear about is a building, and this is a lot more than, than a building. This is programs and people and concepts and theories of what we're going to do and who we're gonna have in the jail and how we're going to treat them.

So, on the one hand, we have what the state has been, been telling us all along is here's what we want in a new jail.

Well, that's fine. This document tells you what the people of this state want in their new jail and is radically different from what the state is planning. So, this is a chance for us to have a voice for the first time, to have a voice in the actual development of this new jail. And I, I really appreciate the number of people, who are going to be a part of this, including people with lived experience.

And I think they're gonna make an invaluable contribution to the development of the new jail in the next year if this resolution passes.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Merce. We have testimony in support from Kat Brady via Zoom. Okay. Any other testifiers in the room? Any other testifiers on Zoom?

Members, questions?

I have a question for Mr. Merce. You mentioned—I'm sorry. I'm not familiar with your working group, so, is your working group currently active?

Yes. We're, we're a 501 C3 nonprofit, and we meet every, every month or whenever we, when, whenever an issue comes up. It's a small group. It's mostly lawyers. But as I mentioned, it, it includes people who, you know, who've been, like, like Dr. Pablo Stewart, who's one of the country's leading forensic psychiatrists, and who's often a consultant to federal judges when they wanna revise their jails and who worked in the jail for several years with the residents from the Johnny Burns School of Medicine.

Do, do you meet with the oversight or attend the oversight commission? Is that meeting...

We don't jointly meet with them, but we, we made a presentation to them of our report. And after we made the presentation, they endorsed, our, our report as what they thought would be the, the way forward for the new jail. That was in 2022. And we, we, I have, I attend most of the meetings—I have, until recently, attended most of the meetings of the Oversight Committee, Commission, and we always present something, almost always, on, on the new jail, ask questions, or make comments.

So, we're, we're pretty active.

Thank you, chair. Thank you.

Any other questions? Director, I have a question. So, I have attended one of the presentations by a group that you folks are, you know, contracting with to build up a new prison and I hear the concerns of the community as saying that they don't have a way to, to, to be engaged in that process. I know that your contractor is making those things open and they're open to the public.

But what I'm hearing from the public is they want to be able to influence the process and not just talk about the bricks and mortar that the contractor seems to be really focused on, but what are the programs that are gonna be built into the space that you guys are building out? And that seems to me what's the purpose of this advisory committee.

And so, is there a process where you can push your contractor to be having those conversations about what the physical space, how it's gonna be designed to be more rehabilitative? Because that's what I found lacking in the one presentation I went to.

I think that, yes, we can. I think what you don't have is you don't have the most up to date renderings of where we are so far. And if you saw those, I think you'd see the questions would be answered. So, do, it— does the committee want us to have public informational briefings? I don't wanna be clear on what the ask is for us leaving the room so I'll know what, what orders to give to the—our architects and to our, developers.

I, I think it needs to be a process where the public is reassured that they're not, you're not building a super prison because that's, like, that's what we hear all the time from the community. We don't want a super prison. We want actually programs. And so, as your contractors are designing the physical space, I know, and, and I know that you're always focused on what is medium facility versus high facility, high security, and I understand that given the different designations and classifications of prisoners.

But at the same time, right, we're—is there a way to design a space so that you're moving people through the process?

And I don't know if it's, like, one part of the prison has to be more highly secured, but as they're able to move out into community, which is the whole purpose of the rehabilitation reintegration model, how is the space being modified and designed for that movement of people?

Okay. So, first, we're building a jail, not a prison. The prison setting is a secure setting. The jail is a secure setting, but it's different. The average person that's in the jail setting, OCCC, is there for 28 days except for pretrial felons who are there for five hundred plus days.

Unfortunately, that's how long it's taking for them to get to court. So, the programs in the jail are not as intensive as the programs in the prison setting where you have people for years and years and you can set up a sequential phasing process of longer term.

But maybe that's the difference. In the jails, there has to be more intensive work being done with them because even if they're there just for twenty eight days, but, but we know they're there longer, that they're getting the training and the, the interventions that they need so that they can then be moved out into community.

We, we don't disagree, and I can provide the committee with a list of the programs we provided on OCCC now. You will see we provide quite a few programs at the facility. But again, I'll give you an example. If somebody did twenty eight days, they can't do substance abuse treatment.

But we know that they're longer than they're—we know you say they're just there for twenty-eight days, but we know that they're actually there longer than twenty-eight days.

Well, the actual misdemeanor, petty misdemeanor and misdemeanor is in custody twenty eight days. The pretrial felons are there for five hundred plus days before they go to court.

Okay. That's an admission of holding pretrial detainees for over five hundred days.

It's not me. It is the courts that keep them in custody. I can't release them.

Okay. Alright. Let's have this discussion. We're gonna—this, this, this resos are gonna keep moving because I think they need to, and we need to get clarification of what we want both DCR and the community to do.

And at some point, there needs to be a better working relationship between everybody and that we're not just speaking past each other because that's what I find happening in these meetings, that we're just always speaking past each other and the lawmakers are caught in the middle oftentimes. So, with that said, thank you, Director. Any other questions, comments, or concerns?

Chair. Director, you made some chairs questioning and, and the conversation about input. And, and you mentioned at least a regular informational briefing, at a, at minimum. I think it would be, I think it's needed that as the process goes through, or, or continues—and I know it's dynamic—that there is that opportunity for public input so that we can glean the best of both worlds.

And that as the process is going through, we don't just get something and just go, surprise, this is what the end product is, versus as it, as it goes, it, it works as needed. And I think that would be very beneficial for public and, and the facilities so that we come up with the best product, at the end.

I, I don't disagree. I think that this measure puts together a group of folks who have that same interest and who we can work with in the designing and planning of the new OCCC.

I, I think as much as we can assure the public and, and advocate groups that this is happening, that'll, that'll keep them off your back, really. Yeah.

Okay.

Chair, just a question. You made a couple of references to pretrial felons. Are you referring to pretrial felony defendants?

Yes. Detainees who are in custody pending trial have a...

So they're technically not felons?

They're pretrial detainees, so they...

I think it's really.

When you say pretrial felons, what we mean is they're pretrial folks who are accused of felony level.

Correct.

Crimes.

But you could understand how that's a big difference. Okay. Thanks.

I see. Alright. Moving okay. Good discussion, moving on.

We're moving on to SCR 147. And I'm pressing because we have an 11:15. I wanna get to it quickly, but we don't have a 12:00 forecast, but I still don't want us to go much longer.

SCR 147 requesting the Federal Government to provide Supplemental Funding to Increase Compensation for ACO's employed by the State of Hawaii's DCR. We have testimony in support from Director.

I'll just summarize real quick. We fully support this measure. We are concerned that with the Federal Government providing funding that the state should look at supplemental funding down the line because we're unsure if the Federal Government can how long they can continue to fund. It would be a short term funding issue. When the administration changes, the funding sources might change.

So that's all we're concerned with. We fully support the measure. We think ACL should get a 15% pay rate across the board immediately. But if we tie it to federal funding, another administration may be able to change that.

Okay. State of Director, because I don't think Mister Frost is here. ACLU testimony and support. Anyone here in in the room? Anyone on Zoom?

Seeing none, questions. I'm actually curious. Is this standard procedure where the feds come in and fund state ACOs?

No. And I have no idea how it would work. But if they're gonna give us the money, I would take it.

It's not standard. I was surprised when the resolution came up that we support it 100%.

What is the, what is, what was the testimony in front of the Senate? I think-

The testimony was, the testimony for the Senate was all nobody testified against it. So I don't know the who wrote the resolution. I don't know how they're gonna get the the Federal Government to pay, and actually, I don't care. But if they can get them to pay for the ACOs to augment the salaries, that's great for us.

Is it even a possibility though?

I have no idea. To be honest with you.

And under this administration.

Well

They might want.

They might want to, but then there's a whole push not to engage because then they could start using our prisons as detention centers. So what is the source I mean, it's a little bit funny, and I typically really appreciate introducers. What is it just because people are so frustrated?

I think that's what it is. But I can tell you assure you that the FTC is underutilized. They can hold 1,100. They have about 300 folks there.

So I don't think the Federal Government-

But it's not being underutilized now because that's a different story. We know that there are more and more immigration detainees there.

About 300.

And that's not something that those people are having some issues then as well, being detained without due process. On that note alright. Thank you for providing a little bit more light on this.

Thank you.

Moving to SCR 182, requesting the Governor and the Department of Health to engage with the US Department of Defense and other federal and military partners to explore establishing a Military Civilian Trauma Partnership to strengthen the Hawaii Trauma System. We have testimony in support from Department of Health in person. Thank you.

Hello, Chair, Vice chair, members of the committee. I'm Andrew Yonemura with the Department of Health EMS. Unfortunately, my EMS Chief is not able to make it today. But on his behalf, we support the testimony and in available for questioning if you have any. But, I'll kinda give you more surface level. I can bring it back to my Chief, if you have more granular detail questions. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Kelly Carlisle in support. Michael Yusenior in support.

Any other testifiers in the room? We have late testimony from the Department of Health.

Oh, that's your testimony as well. Okay.

Sorry. I misspoke. So you've talked about your testimony already, Department of Health.

And then let's see.

Any other testifiers? Any other testifiers on Zoom? Seeing none members questions. Go ahead

Question for the only testifier.

May not be able to answer these questions. I think this resolution made a couple references to reimbursements, compensation. And I'm like, which direction is that money flowing? Is it would it be moving from the Federal Government to local service providers, or would it be moving from local service providers to the Federal Government?

To my knowledge, currently, if I remember correctly. Tripler is a level two that is not utilized for, you know, for example, if there's a TBI or Traumatic Brain Injury. And you know, minutes count, usually, I believe right now, I believe maybe Neil can answer this or I can ask my EMS Chief. But right now, it goes straight to the level one trauma center or any place where they can handle the TBIs and such.

So because of that, right now if we were to have a partner, Civilian Military Partnership with the level two Tripler, I believe we would be giving the State funds would, go to a Tripler. And for uses of their services if we have a a patient with a TBI, for example, or such and such. Like I said, I could be wrong. This is going more surface level but I can, you know, get find the answer for you from the Chief.

But to my knowledge, I believe it would go to from the State to the or Tripler.

So right now, civilians because it because I understand Tripler obviously only serves military families. So would this mean that a non-military connected family would get services at Tripler then

Yeah. Yes. So this would this would allow for more. So this would be inclusion into the trauma system in which, yes, it would kind of have be served at Tripler. And then we would pay for their services because minutes count, in terms of if there's an emergency or if there's anything, any kind of illness that needs, you know minutes or seconds.

But like I said, let me get back to you, for the, you know, more granular detail, but my Chief can answer those questions if you have.

Representative Shimizu.

I'm sorry if I missed the conversation, but are you aware or is this happening to any degree right now? The collaboration between Tripler and State.

To my knowledge, I think I would have to ask my EMS Chief. Like I said, we apologize. He was calling to a meeting. To my knowledge, right now, we're in the talks of it but I would need to bring that information back to you. Thank you.

Can you take this question back? Is there this kind of military civilian population partnership in any other jurisdiction, in either state or any other county.

Yes.

It's very common?

It's very, it is to my knowledge it is common. I don't know how to extent of how many states. My Chief would know much more than that but, yes, it is common in other states.

Okay. I think it's really important if you go to the next committee that those kind of examples be highlighted. So that we understand what it is, what the scope of a partnership could look like. Because I think in, like, massive emergency situations where there's multiple traumas, then that could be quickly probably deployed. And it like, even though we don't have processes in place, it could probably be quickly done and overlooked. Right?

But if there's an opportunity to actually build out the system so that there's lines of communication and what that looks like in other states, that's what we need to know. Is there examples like this?

I mean, but I do sorry.

Yes. Sorry. I wouldn't.

Yeah, no. I just think, are there any concerns with providers of medical services who are not Triple, but the community hospitals, the community care centers who might feel like you're actually taking money away.

They built the infrastructure to serve the community, and now we're redirecting to a federal center and not utilizing what we have so that they can submit their reimbursement and bills. And you know what I mean? You're taking business away from a local infrastructure.

Of course. If I may, like I said, this is to my knowledge. My EMS Chief can get further clarification. But to my knowledge, in some cases, some these local hospitals are unable to handle some certain situations.

And so I believe Tripler being a level two is a little higher level, level one being Queens, level two being Tripler.

And in some certain situations, Tripler is able to handle it where the local hospital or center is unable to handle it. So

I think that's what the reason that we need to have an exploratory conversation because you know what, I view this as being a way to address a problem. It's like when we had the fireworks disaster and we had multiple injuries That not all of the, level one Queens and Straub could not handle.

If there had been any more disastrous explosions, we could have had like, basically a bomb situation where I guess bombs are the themes of today.

A bomb situation where we had the victims and we would need to find another hospital, and I would think that Triplet would actually be well situated to do something like that. And so that's the kind of scenarios that we have to build on and plan for in this situation.

I'd like to echo that. Like I said, more further more further questions, I'll take it to my Chief, and I'll send it over to the Committee. And thank you very much for everything, Chair, and best of luck on your future endeavors.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Thank you, sir. Any other questions? Okay. We're gonna recess this portion and jump into our 11:15AM agenda. So recess.

Thank you, chairs, vice chair. We have SCR 180, urgent state agencies that own or control land in West Maui to implement and enforce aggressive vegetation management, fuel reduction, defensible space, and emergency access measures to reduce wildfire risk to Lahaina and surrounding communities. We have testimony, in support from DHL, DHHL. Excuse me. Thank you.

Testimony in support from, HHFDC. Testimony in support from, DLNR. Members, any questions? Seeing none, members, we are going to, recess, just to make sure we can get quorum, and then we'll reconvene both our 10:30 and 11:15AM agenda for the

Which Well, let

Let's just recess because I need to get my cuts. So we'll recess, and we'll be you can be in a minute. Let's recess. Reconvening our 10:30am agenda for committee on public safety. Moving to our first SCR on the agenda, SCR 54, requesting the state fire marshal to appoint a hydrogen fire safety expert and provide training on hydrogen related safety protocols.

Chair's recommendation is to, pass this as is. Questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none, vice chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 54. Chair's recommendation is to pass as is. Chair and vice chair vote aye. Representative Hashem.

Aye.

Representative Ichiyama.

Aye.

Representative Morikawa.

Aye.

Representative Poepoe.

Aye.

Representative Woodson is excused. Representative Shimizu.

Aye.

Representative Souza.

Aye.

Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Members on SCR59 SD 1 requesting the governor's established procedures to authorize certain health care professionals to engage in the practice of their respective professions in the state without a Hawaii issued license during a state of emergency. Chair's recommendation is to pass this as is. Questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Okay.

Voting on SCR59 on SD 1. Chair's recommendation is to pass as is. Are there any members wishing to vote with reservations? Or no votes? Seeing none, Chair your recommendation is adopted.

And sorry, I'm recognizing the absence of excused absence of, Woodson. Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to SCR 62 SD 1 requesting the 9141 board to establish or utilize an appropriate working group to engage with the disability community to address continuing access issues in the state's emergency and 911 response system. Chair's recommendation is to, do an. house Actually, Chair's recommendation is k.

Chair's recommendation is going to be to pass this as is and note in the committee report, that the working group, being developed by the, 911 board, be focused on ensuring that there's an integration of the system with EMS infrastructure and dispatchers and EMS professionals on the ground. And that part of this working group is also being asked to educate the public about the EMS, the 911 system.

Members, my recommendation is to do this and not to actually create a HD because if we do that, then this has to then cross over and then have another move to agree. And that's what actually could actually stop this resolution in a way that's not good. So I would like to express that this is that those concerns were raised in the, so the concerns that were raised by the, by the disability council be noted in the committee report.

And so, therefore, as this moves forward and hopefully as this gets, this can get passed through, that this working group knows that it's going to be tasked, that really, nothing stops them from focusing on the kind of integration that, miss Bartoldus was was talking about. Does that make sense, members?

Yep. Okay. So to pass as is, noting in the committee report, the issues and concerns and hopes that the 911 working group will focus on the integration of the system, especially because of the disturbing news that we learned that it's not as integrated as we thought as we thought they communicated it was on Maui and Oahu. Vice chair for the vote.

Yeah.

Voting on SCR62 SD 1. Chair's recommendations to pass as is noting the excused absence of representative Woodson. Are there any members wishing to vote? No. Or with reservations, seeing none, Chair recommendation is adopted.

Okay. SCR179 urging the county of Maui to enforce the provisions of the fire code of the county of Maui relating to fire hazards, fresh clearance, fuel breaks, roadside vegetation clearing, and emergency access. Chair's recommendation is to pass this as is. Questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR179, chair's recommendation is to pass as is. Noting the excused absence of representative Woodson, are there any members wishing to vote no? Or with reservations? Seeing none, Chair your recommendation is adopted.

SCR74, requencing the auditor to conduct an audit of no bid contracts issued by state and county agencies under proclamations to clear the states of emergency during the year period between 01/01/2020 and 12/31/2025. Chair's recommendation is to pass this as is. Questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR74. Chair's recommendation is to pass as is. Noting the excused absence of Representative Woodson, are there any members wishing to vote no or with reservations? Seeing none, Chair recommendation is adopted.

SCR28, requesting the Department of Defense to convene a working group to develop recommendations for our State Of Hawaii commemorative Vietnam Veterans Medal. Chair's recommendation is to pass as is. Questions, comments, or concerns?

Chair, I have a comment. Yes.

I'm gonna be voting with reservations. As I mentioned during my questioning, I'm concerned with those veterans who have been who It could do harm to because these veterans may feel like they were wronged by the entire experience of their time in Vietnam War, serving on behalf of this country. And this medal may be seen as putting a fresh coat of paint over a lifetime of trauma and long term injuries.

And, for those reasons, I have that reservation of concern, but still support this moving forward.

Thank you, Vice Chair. Any other questions, comments or concerns seeing none by share for the vote?

Voting on, SCR28 Chairs recommendation is to pass as is. Noting the excuse absence of representative Woodson. Are there any members wishing to vote now? Any members other than myself wishing to vote with reservations. Same non Chair.

Your recommendation is adopted.

Okay. SCR60 SD 1 requesting a DCR to provide an update on the findings of the proof of concept study titled breaking cycles, alternative models of rehabilitation and restorative justice on Wahoo. Chair's recommendation is to pass as is, members. I know I wanna acknowledge the testimony of a director, but I think, this is another 1 where if we're going to make any changes, we'll do it in JHA, and we should actually consult with, Senate counterparts to see if they would be acceptable.

Because if we do make changes and that's not accepted, by the Senate, then Miss Rizzo actually dies.

So we're gonna pass this 1 as is as well. Questions, comments, or concerns? Seeing on vice chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR60 SD 1, Chair's recommendation is to pass as is, noting the excused absence of representative Woodson. Are there any members wishing to vote no or with reservations? Seeing none, chair your recommendation is adopted.

Same recommendation for SCR89 SD 1. I think while there's, some tweaks we may wanna make on this to make it more specific, any changes will actually cause us to have to go back to the Senate. I'd rather we maybe take up any amendments if we do take them up at all in JHA. So Chair's recommendation for SCR89 SD 1 is also to, pass as is. Questions, comments, or concerns?

Seeing none, Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR89 SD 1. Chair's recommendation is to pass as is. Noting the excused absence of of representative Woodson, are there any members wishing to vote no or with reservations? Seeing none, Chair your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. SCR147 requesting the Federal Government to provide supplemental funding to increase compensation for ACOs employed by the state of Hawaii's Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. I'm gonna pass this as is and let Jaeha take it up if they want to. We could do further exploration if this is even a possibility, but I think just to keep us moving, we'll pass as is. Questions, comments, or concerns?

Seeing none Vice Chair for the

No, sorry. Oh. I do have a comment or concern. Comment. Is, do you find there to be any value put into the report, the concern you raised that it could somehow provide an access point for the feds to use our facilities to detain ICE detainees?

We can note that as a concern. Sure.

Okay. Thank you. So, anyway, I'll be voting with reservations, but because of that. Okay.

Okay.

Okay. So you made your recommendation. Voting on SCR147, Chairs. Recommendation is passed as is. Noting the excuse absence of representative Woodson.

Are there any members wishing to vote now? Any other members wishing to vote with reservations other than myself As seen on Chair recommendation is adopted.

SCR 182 requesting Governor and Department of Health to engage with the US Department of Defense and other Federal Military partners to explore establishing a Military Civilian Trauma partnership to strengthen the Hawaii Trauma System. Chair's recommendation is to pass this as is.

Questions, comments or concerns seeing none. Vice chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 182, Chairs recommendations to pass as is, noting the excuse. Absence of just sorry. I'm Representative Woodson. It's in. Are there any members wishing to vote?

Are there any members wishing to vote with reservations? I'll be voting with reservations. Chair recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Okay.

We're joining this meeting, opening up the 11:15AM agenda joint with Water Land SCR 180, Urgency Agencies that Owner Control Land in response to Implement Enforce Aggressive Vegetation Management, Fuel Reduction, Defensible Space and Emergency Access Measures to Reduce Wildfire Risk to Lahaina and surrounding communities.

Trevor shares recommendation for PBS is to pass as is. Questions, comments or concerns? seeing a measure for the vote.

Voting on SCR 180, Chairs recommendations to pass as is. Voting the excuse absence of Woodson. Are there any members wishing to vote? No. Any members wishing to vote with reservations seeing none. Chair your recommendation is adopted.

Turning over to Waterland.

Waterland, same recommendation.

Okay. Members, we're voting on SCR 180. Chair's recommendation is to pass as is.

Are there any reservations or no's? Seeing none.

Chair. Will cutting the absence of Representative Woodson. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

We're adjourned. Thank you all.