House Floor

Will the House come to order? Mister Clerk, please call the roll.

[Roll Call] Madam Speaker, 50 members are present.

Members, at this time, the Chair would like to introduce a special visitor to today's floor session. Seated behind me is associate justice Todd W. Edens. Item number two, reading of the journal. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, may this matter be deferred.

So ordered. Item number three, messages from the governor. Mister Clerk, are there any messages from the governor?

Yes, Madam Speaker. We're in receipt of governor's message number 1103, informing the house that Senate Bill number 3225 was signed into law on 04/13/2026 and designated as act three. May this matter be received and filed?

So ordered. Mister Clerk, is there another message from the governor?

Yes, Madam Speaker. We are on further receipt of message number 808, appointing M. Cov Ratcliffe to the 28th House District. May this message be received for immediate action.

So ordered. Will the sergeant at arms please escort Mr. M. Cov Ratcliffe to the rostrum for the oath of office? Associate Justice Todd W. Eddins, please proceed.

Please repeat after me. I, Michael Covenant Ratcliffe, do solemnly swear

I, Michael Covenant Ratcliffe, do solemnly swear

that I will support and defend

That I will support and defend

the Constitution of The United States

The Constitution of The United States

And the constitution of the state of Hawaii.

And the constitution of the state of Hawaii.

And that I will faithfully discharge my duties.

And I will faithfully discharge my duties.

As a Member of the House of Representatives.

As a Member of the House of Representatives

of the state of Hawaii.

Of the state of Hawaii.

To the best of my ability

To the best of my ability.

Congratulations. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Associate Justice Eddins. Will the sergeant at arms please escort the new representative to his seat, and the associate justice from the restroom. Vice Speaker Ichiyama, will you please present the new representative with lei on behalf of the house. Here to support the to support Representative Ratcliffe are his mother, Araquel Raposo, stepfather, Kaki Raposo, in the gallery. Can you please rise?

And his friends, Colin Brown, Lorna Strand, Breeze Morita, and Justin Kimata. Mister Clerk, are there any further messages from the governor?

Madam speaker, there are none.

Item number four, Senate communications. Mister Clerk, are there any Senate communications?

Yes, Madam Speaker. If you and the Members will turn your attention to the addendum to today's order of the day, we are in receipt of a communication informing the House that the Senate has disagreed to the amendments proposed by the House to the noted Senate bills. We are in further receipt of communications returning the noted House bills all having passed third reading in the Senate.

Representative Kahaloa.

Madam Speaker, I move to disagree to the amendments made by the Senate to the noted House bills.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any discussion? All those in favor, say Aye. All those opposed, say no. The motion is carried. Members, are there any introductions?

Representative Tam.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have the pleasure of introducing my staff in the gallery today. We have our office manager, Flora Sammis. Please rise when your name is called. Cindy Ellen Russell, Christopher Prendergast, and our intern Jacob Schneider.

Welcome to your House of Representatives, and thank you for showing up.

Representative Kila.

Mahalo MadamSpeaker in the gallery today. I would like to welcome the amazing staff of my office. My office, I have the privilege to serve Assisi Shirk 44. Joining me this session, I have Meihana Kapoi, auntie Christine Watanabe, and my intern, Akamu Campbell.

Madam Speaker, Akamu also celebrated his birthday. So Akamu, happy birthday, and welcome to your folks house of representatives.

Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I just noticed in the gallery a constituent of mine, Doctor. Melanie Lau. Would you stand and be recognized? Welcome to your House of Representatives.

Madam Speaker, can I have a second?

Please proceed.

I also would like to recognize a long time advocate for our incarcerated population. Kat Brady from the, Alliance of Prison. I messed that up. Where is it? Community Alliance on Prisons.

Welcome to your House of Representatives.

Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'd also like to welcome, another community advocate, Henry Curtis of life of the land. Thank you very much. Welcome to your House of Representatives.

Representative Kapela.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In the gallery today, there are, advocates and friends of public education from HSTA. We have our HSTA president, Oso Toohey. We also have Jason Bradshaw and Millie and someone very special joining us all the way from NEA in DC. We have Lindsay Pfeiffer.

She came and joined us on Hawaii Island this last weekend. And it was such a privilege to be to have our local students in rural communities supported as change makers by NEA. So thank you and welcome to the House of Representatives.

Representative Alcos.

Madam Speaker, I see one of my friends up in the gallery. Love, can you please stand? Welcome to the House of Representative.

Okay. Let's move on. The Chair will call a recess to allow the Members to congratulate Representative Ratcliffe. Recess. With the House come to order.

We're on the order of the day. Five eight unfinished business. Members we are on part one consent calendar five a and six a. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules of the House in order to consider certain Senate bills for third reading by consent calendar.

Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any questions? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. All those opposed, say no. The motion is carried. Representative Kahaloa.

Madam Speaker, I move to adopt standing committee reports listed on pages 1 through 11 and that the Senate bills listed on page 1 through 13 as may be amended past third reading.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Members, there will be no discussion as these are items agreed to by this body for placement on the consent calendar. Representative Morikawa, for the vote.

Thank you Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, all majority Members vote Aye with the exception of the following. On page six, stand calm report number 2086-26, SB number 259, SD1 HD1, Rep Amato votes no.

Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, on the measures before us, all Minority Members vote Aye with the exception of one bill. And at this time, I'll yield to the Assistant Minority Floor Leader.

Representative Reyes Oda. For bill, for SD HSCR 1827 SB 3262, Aye vote no.

Have all votes been cast? Said Senate bills. Representative Reyes Oda, that bill that you referenced is not on the consent calendar. So that can be taken up on the ordinary calendar.

Okay. Thank you. Alright.

Have all votes been cast. Set said Senate bills passed third reading. Members please remember to submit to the clerk the list of Senate bills on the consent calendar for which you will be inserting written comments in support or in opposition. This must be done by the adjournment of today's floor session. Members, we will have a short recess prior to convening the ordinary calendar.

Recess subject to the call of the Chair.

Will the House come to order? Members, we are on page 14, part two, ordinary calendar. Five b, unfinished business. Representative Kahaloa.

Madam Speaker I move to adopt the Standing Committee Reports listed on pages 14 through 22 and that the accompanied Senate bills as may be amended past third reading. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker second the motion.

Any discussion on these items beginning with HSCR number 1926. Representative Garcia.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition with brief comments.

Please proceed.

This bill authorizes the Department of Transportation to assume responsibilities under the National Environmental Protection Act of '28 for highway projects as well as railroads, public transportation, or multimodal projects within the state, allowing for streamlined environmental reviews. That means what they mean by that is that this will allow the Hawaii department transportation quote categorical exclusions from federally required environmental assessments or environmental impact statements for transportation projects.

While the current federal administration is comfortable dismantling environmental protections, we should not be following their lead and codifying it in our statutes. Thank you.

Representative Poepoe.

With reservations.

So ordered.

Speaker.

Representative Cochran.

Thank you. With reservations.

So ordered. Moving on to Standing Committee Report 1827. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition. This bill requires the Hawaii's teacher standards.

Please proceed.

I'm sorry. Thank you. Opposition with comments. Thank you. It requires the Hawaii teacher standards board to submit three nominees for its executive director to the board of education, then it requires the executive director from the nominees on the list, then subject to this executive director to send a confirmation. So the h t the Hawaii teacher standards board is a professional licensing board.

How many other EDs of a lice professional licensing boards do we require such, barriers or confirmation from the Senate? The Senate does not even confirm our DOE superintendent. Having served on the Board of Education as well as on the Hawaii Teachers Standards Board, I can assure you that the Board Members of the Hawaii Teachers Standards Board are much more knowledgeable about the profession of teaching and the licensure of teachers more than the majority of the BOE members currently on the board of education.

Certainly more knowledgeable than a majority of senators. This bill would politicize the appointment of an education of the executive director and diminish the quality of our public education system.

Thank you.

Representative Reyes Oda.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

I have concerns about SB 3262. Not because of who serves as executive director today, but because of the precedent this bill sets. Advice and consent exists as a constitutional check on executive power. It is traditionally reserved for department directors, judges, members of boards and commissions, and individuals who exercise independent state authority, not their staff. The executive director of the Hawaii state Hawaii teacher standards board does not meet that standard.

This is a professional board directed position, not a cabinet level role. For example, we do not require Senate confirmation for the superintendent of education who oversees the largest department in our state. Yet this bill would require legislative confirmation for the executive director who reports to a board and implements policy rather than setting it. My concern is not oversight. It's the politics.

Bringing the legislature into staff level appointments risks undermining the independence of our boards and injecting political considerations into professional education standards. HTSB is comprised of 17 Board Members, six licensed teachers, one from charter school, three educational officers, the board of ed chair, the DOE superintendent, a rep for independent schools, the College of Ed Dean, the chair for the Native Hawaiian Education Council, two members of the public, and one nonvoting aspiring teacher candidate. 12 of those Board Members are appointed by the governor.

The others hold their membership by virtue of their position. If we believe more public accountability is needed, about board structure and governance, not about subjecting operational leadership to the legislative to legislative approval.

If public accountability is desired, the Hawaii State Teachers Standards Board should become an elected board. For these reasons, I'm voting no. I remain cautious about this measure and the precedent it would establish. Thank you.

Representative Woodson.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, in support.

Please proceed.

Just a quick comment. This proposal Just a quick comment. This proposal simply provides an additional layer of oversight for a board that is very important to the operation of our state. This is the Hawaii Teachers Standards Board. They are responsible for filtering, to make sure that the individuals in front of our classes is are qualified to do the work. And so for that reason, in others, I stand in support.

Moving on to Standing Committee Report 1828. Representative Cochran.

With reservations.

Please. So ordered. Are you on 3262.

I stood up there.

Okay. We're on 1828, and we can go back to that if you have concerns. We're on 18 Standing Committee Report 1828.

28, no.

So ordered.

I also wanted to go back to 1827. Thank you.

K. Moving on. Let's go back then to 1827. Representative Cochran.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. With reservations, and may I have the the words of the Representative from Ewa Beach and Kakaako inserted as my own. Thank you.

So ordered. Representative Garcia.

With reservations, and I and I'd like to adopt the words of the A78965410ssistant Minority Floor Leader as my own.

So ordered. Representative Matsumoto.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Gedeon.

Same request, please.

So ordered. Representative Alcos.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Poepoe.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Souza.

With reservations.

So ordered. Moving on to 1828, 1829. Representative Garcia.

So ordered. Representative Cochran.

With reservations.

Also with reservations.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Reservations, please.

So ordered. The top of page 15, 1830. Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Cochran.

No vote.

So ordered. Standing Committee Report 1831. Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Cochran.

No vote.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in support with reservations.

So ordered. Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In JJ committee, besides the DLNR providing comments, there were an additional 22 testifiers with all supporting a night spearing ban.

Testifiers include Friends of Hanauma Bay, Nakamakai, Hawaii Ocean Legislative Task Force, Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition, the nature conservancy, Hawaii food and policy, an additional 16 individuals that include an associate professor of marine biology at the University of Hawaii, a graduate student at the University Hilo focusing in marine policy and science, a professor of marine biology at the University of Hawaii, and a chief scientist for the National Geographic Society's pristine seas program.

Based on the primary purpose of protecting our coral reefs and the knowledgeable testifiers, I would implore the reintroduction of such provision into the bill. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Muraoka.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Gedeon.

Reservations, and I would like to adopt the words of the Representative from Guadalupe, please.

So ordered. Moving on to 1832. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in support with reservations.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Instead of adding more bureaucracy in our government, I suggest for efficiency and cost purposes, instead of establishing a whole new committee, we we have just one state arborist from DLNR leading the coordination and working together with the current county arborist advisory committees. I wanna thank the, wall chair for including that, suggestion in the committee reports. And finally, I I don't feel like we need to dictate to these county committees the number of members in their committee. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

1834. Representative Garcia.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Cochran.

No.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Reservations.

So ordered. Moving on to the top of page 16, Standing Committee Report 2020, 2021, 2022. Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Reservations with comments.

Please proceed. I support that this bill affirms student athletes right to engage in name, image, and likeness activities for compensation as was prescribed by the Supreme Court. However, while I support and I also support that this bill, make sure that the UH's NIL policies comply with Title IX, while this bill does not appropriate any taxpayer funds, it does reference, that NIL agreements, and I quote from the bill, NIL agreements that are funded with state resources.

So it references the fact that we will be allocate we may be allocating state resources to this program. Currently, only private funds are being used to compensate for NIL. This bill presumes that state funds will go toward NIL compensation.

Earlier this month, I surveyed my constituents and in the last week of getting responses back, over 80% of those who responded do not support using state taxpayer money to fund NIL compensation. Thank you.

Representative Garcia.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm gonna be clear from the outset that I don't necessarily oppose NIL. I understand the intent behind it. Student athlete should have the opportunity to benefit from their talents. But what what we're seeing today is something very different. NIL has ballooned out of control.

What started as a well intentioned effort has quickly evolved into a system that's reshaping college athletics in ways that are not healthy for students, and not for the universities or colleges across our country. Students are in school. School should be their main focus. Professional sports, that's where the big money should be. But instead, we're watching college athletics drift further into a professional model.

Athletes are transferring year after year chasing better deals, chasing higher pay, and bigger exposure often at the expense of their education. Commitment to a program, to a school, even to earning a degree is taking the back burner. Recently, the White House brought together stakeholders from across the country. Leaders in college sports, policy makers, and experts to discuss the state of NIL. One of the key takeaways was the lack of guard rails.

There is no consistent national framework, and schools are struggling to keep up. Another major concern raised was the growing imbalance. Programs with more resources are gaining even more advantage, while others are being left behind in what has become an arms race among college sports. That should give us all pause. Because instead of slowing things down and putting thoughtful guard rails in place, this bill moves us further in that direction, embedding NIL deeper into our university system.

And now we're being asked to do it with public involvement and public resources. I don't believe taxpayers should be footing the bill to pay student athletes while they're in college receiving their education. I worry about the impact this will have on Hawaii's university. No vote.

Representative Matsumoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise with reservations.

Please proceed.

And if I can have permission to insert comments into the journal.

So ordered.

Thank you.

Representative Cochran.

Madam Speaker, I'm pardon my I missed 2021-26. So when at the proper time, we can go back. Thank you.

We will. K. If there's no, further comments on 2022, let's go back to 2021. Representative Cochran.

Thank you. I wanted to enter a no with reservations.

So ordered.

Thank you.

Moving on to 2023. Oops. Representative Cochran, was that on 2021 with reservations?

Yes. With reservations.

Thank you for that clarification. K. Let's move Representative Iwamoto on 2021. K. Let's move on to 2023. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition with the.

Please proceed.

Thank you. This bill requires that tuition, tuition related course, and fee charges, and other charges to students deposited into the University of Hawaii tuition and fee special fund, that on 06/30/2029, that those unencumbered funds, lapsed into the general fund.

I read a editorial by the Honolulu star advertiser that, disagreed with with that, with that conduct or that, moving funds from the student tuition into the general fund. And I agree with their position, which we should not be, doing this practice even once. Thank you.

Representative Cochran.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. K. We're now at a. Representative Poepoe.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Garrett.

Thank you Madam Speaker. Rising in support. I'll be

Please proceed.

Madam Speaker, speaking from my role as chair of your committee on higher education, let me begin by saying this clearly. I love the University of Hawaii. I'm proud to be an alumnus, and I care very deeply about its success. Few institutions matter more to the future of our state. But in this role, my responsibility is not just to support the university, it's also to provide thoughtful oversight and ensure accountability.

This bill comes out of that responsibility. Over the course of this session, the Higher Education Committee has spent a significant amount of time engaging with the university on its finances. What we've seen is that the tuition and fee special fund has grown to a level that is now roughly double what is contemplated under the board of regents own reserve policy. Amounting amounting to a surplus of over $200,000,000 above what is called for. Madam speaker, that is not a small discrepancy.

And as chair, I believe it is my obligation to take that seriously. Madam speaker, there are legitimate reasons for maintaining reserves, uncertainty in federal funding, concerns about enrollment trends, and the broader fiscal environment. Those are real risks, and the university is right to plan for them. But at the same time, when reserves grow well beyond the university's own targets, it is appropriate for this body to ask questions. Is holding more than they need?

Are they striking the right balance between saving for uncertainty and investing in students today? And are they being transparent with the students and families who are ultimately contributing to these funds? I Also, I wanna thank the finance chair for his thoughtful amendments to this measure. The bill before us reflects a much more measured approach. It is now structured as a one time sweep in 2029, which gives the university a three year runway to respondably responsibly spend these funds down for the benefit of students.

This measure is not about micromanaging the university. It's about reinforcing accountability and ensuring alignment with the policies the board itself has set. I want to emphasize this is not meant to be punitive. It is part of a broader ongoing dialogue between the legislature and the university about stewardship, transparency, and trust. As chair of higher education, I take seriously both sides of that equation.

Being a strong advocate for the university, and also ensuring that we are asking the hard questions when necessary. Supporting and holding it accountable are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they go hand in hand. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Shimizu.

Support with reservations. Thank you.

So ordered. Moving on to the top of page 17, 2024, 2025. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in support with a brief comment.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm glad that our public employees are able to get this hazard pay. And I would hope and advocate that we would be able to do the same for our teachers sometime in the future. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Please proceed.

2026, 2027. Representative Garcia.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Alcos.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Gedeon.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I'm in support of our Aloha Stadium redevelopment, But based on opposition testimony from our current developer, I would share the following, which, is important. I believe, communication from our lead, partner in this endeavor. This bill appears to add an additional layer of requirements and considerations to the development of the new stadium and the surrounding lands. We are concerned that the unintended consequences of this measure will be to slow down the momentum that the project currently has.

And request that this measure be deferred pending an analysis as to the potential impact of the measure on the overall development process and the impact on the timely delivery of the stadium and surrounding lands. We are also concerned that these additional requirements may make the project unfinanceable. Additionally, there is an inconsistency and possible overlap in areas of responsibility to the extent that infrastructure and public facilities are integral parts of any development.

Although SB 2599 SD2 HD2 references pending agreements, it lacks explicit language that states the measure will not affect agreements already executed and or that are contemplated prior to its enactment. Madam speaker, the developer has worked earnestly and tirelessly to deliver this project to our state for the public's benefit.

With such a complicated process accomplished to date, these serious concerns from our developer that could create delays and co and more cost to the state. I urge our body to defer this bill to give the developer the opportunity to more thoroughly review and prudently coordinate this legislation for our mutual benefit. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you. Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition with a brief comment.

Please proceed.

This bill includes references to Aloha Stadium and state taxpayer appropriations. The survey my constituent survey that I referenced earlier, also included a question regarding the new Aloha Stadium.

A majority of the three of the over 300 responses that I received in the last week, a majority indicated that they either do not want a new stadium or that the stadium should be built only with private funding, not state taxpayer funds. Thank you very much.

We're on the top of page 18. Standing Committee Report 2028. Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Garcia.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Gedeon.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Matsumoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Reservations, please.

So ordered. Representative Cochran.

No. Opposition and, enter written comments, please.

So ordered. Representative Muraoka.

So ordered. 2029. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition with brief comments.

Please proceed.

This bill requires the office of planning and sustainable development to plan and serve in a coordinating role to develop shoreline adaptation pathways, plans for regional shoreline mitigation districts designated by OPSD.

This bill takes the lead away from DLNR and allows and the allowable mitigation strategies that are identified in this bill include permanent beach armoring, elevating, and flood proofing. The term adaptation is used more often in this bill than the term mitigation. However, there are no assurances that the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development would actually choose retreating from the shoreline to protect beach access over hardening the shoreline to protect private property and investors. Thank you.

Representative Shimizu.

With reservations, please.

So ordered. Representative Alcos.

Reservations.

So ordered. Representative Cochran.

Also with reservations.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. When when time permits, can we go back to, SCR 2026, please?

Yes. Okay. Let's, Representative Perruso.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Cochran.

May I enter written comments?

So ordered.

Speaker.

Representative Poepoe.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Souza.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Kapela.

With reservations.

So ordered. K. Let's move back to.

Excuse me. Speaker.

It was with reservations, but I guess I'm gonna, put in opposition so I can enter words into the journal. Written remarks.

Representative.

So ordered.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Going back then to 2026. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, with reservations.

So ordered. Moving on to Standing Committee Report 2032. 2032. Representative Poepoe.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Cochran. No.

Rep moving on to Standing Committee Report, 2033. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill tries to address dishonest contractors who get the job by low bid and achieve their low bid budget by cheating their workers of fair wages. This also takes away business from legitimate contractors. From conversation with labor and their testimony, this can be repeated multiple times from the same dishonest contractor. This bill addresses this problem by allowing the county to deny, revoke, or suspend the building permit as a means to expel this bad contractor.

However, by addressing the problem like this, unless you catch this problem upfront, which is unlikely because only after getting the job the contractor subsequently cheats by underpaying personnel, you are actually penalizing the owner who now has to find another replacement contractor, which is not an easy thing by any means. For those who are familiar with or have done a home renovation work, contractors are in short supply.

And to find a replacement who is available to be inserted immediately, and also to try to estimate the cost of what's left of the job to complete and agree to do it for the same price, again unlikely. This will no doubt cause delays, increased cost, and frustration to say the least.

In addition to that, the owner also will need to reapply for a new permit, hoping the permit process, which they've waited for maybe months for the approval to start the project to begin with, that this new reapplied for permit will be done in five days as stated in this bill.

There was no testimony from the Department of Permit and Planning, but I would guess that with their backlog of work, it would be quite difficult for them to insert this unexpected occurrence and complete this approval process in five days. That's that's just my opinion. So we have a legitimate problem, but I believe not quite the right solution.

What could or should be done is for the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, who is tasked with this enforcement to penalize any contractor who has been caught doing this dishonest practice, increase fines and penalties, and establish a reasonable time frame that this contractor is disqualified from doing business. By passing this bill, we will have the unintended consequence of penalizing the innocent owner instead.

That is that is my perspective on it. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Perruso.

Speaker, when we have a moment, can we go back to SCR 2032?

Yes.

With reservations, please.

On, Standing Committee Report 2032?

Correct.

Reservations. Okay. So ordered. Let's move to Standing Committee Report 2034. Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Cochran. On the top of page 19, Standing Committee Report 2035. Representative Shimizu.

Rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. At its core, this bill attempts to regulate how federal immigration enforcement operates within our state. While I understand the intent behind the measure, this approach raises important concerns. This bill creates a clear conflict with federal authority. Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, and policies that attempt to limit or redefine that authority risk preemption challenges and unnecessary litigation.

The bill adds significant operational burdens on our law enforcement agencies. It requires new policies, reporting structures, training, and compliance mechanisms. All of which divert time and resources away from core public safety responsibilities. These are not small changes. They are ongoing ad administrative costs that agencies will have to absorb.

And this is in addition to current manpower shortages and current challenges. Measure risk limiting cooperation between local and federal agencies in ways that could have real consequences for public safety. Whether it is information sharing or coordinated enforcement efforts, restricting collaboration can create gaps that bad actors may exploit. And we need to remember and realize that there are real hidden bad actors that need to be uncovered.

There are still key ambiguities in this bill, particularly around standards like reasonable suspicion and how enforcement boundaries will be applied in practice.

We risk inconsistent enforcement and confusion for the very officers we rely on to keep our communities safe. Thank you for your indulgence. I'll read a short statement from police chief from Hawaii out Hawaii Island County who says it pretty pretty clearly. HPD respectfully recommends that the legislature delegate development of statewide policies on facial coverings, identification standards, and civil immigration related procedures to the law enforcement standards board.

This approach maintains transparency and public trust while preserving officer safety, operational effectiveness, and consistent implementation across state of Hawaii's law enforcement agencies.

The law enforcement standards board is designed to consult with practitioners, assess operational implications, update best practices, and issue uniform statewide policies. Embedding highly detailed operational rules into statute reduces flexibility, may lead to unintended consequences, and complicates rapid adaptation to changing legal or tactical circumstances. End quote. Members, this bill introduces more uncertainty than clarity. It complicates enforcement, increases cost, and exposes the state to legal risk, all without clear measure measurable benefits.

And for this reason, I respectfully urge a no vote. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Tarnas.

In support.

Please proceed.

Thank you. Your judiciary and Hawaiian affairs committee was very careful in crafting this measure so that it does not direct or limit what the federal agents can do regarding immigration. Immigration law is federal law and this bill does not limit what federal agents can do. What it does is provide clarity for our local law enforcement, state and County, as to what they can do.

And it actually makes sure that they focus on the areas of enforcement that they have responsibility for, which is state laws and County laws, and not get distracted by trying to work on immigration law.

This measure establishes provisions limiting state and federal collaboration for purposes of immigration enforcement operations. It requires state and county law enforcement agencies to establish and publicly post written policies regarding civil immigration enforcement. That's transparency and that's what we really need here. So we can continue to build trust between the community and our law enforcement agents here in the state.

This measure prohibits law enforcement officers from initiating or prolonging a stop detention or arrest of a person for the purpose of determining the person's civil immigration status, except under certain circumstances.

Again, immigration law is federal law. Our state and, county law enforcement officers should not be spending their time enforcing federal law. This measure establishes as a policy of the Department of Law Enforcement that civil immigration activity involving state and county participation or facilities shall only proceed under certain conditions. And it requires the Department of Law Enforcement to assist state and county agencies in maintaining compliance with the Civil Immigration Enforcement policy. This promotes transparency, trust, and does not limit federal immigration enforcement activities.

I urge Members to support this. Thank you.

Representative Garcia.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you Madam Speaker. You know, to say that this bill provides clarity of what law enforcement officers can do here in Hawaii, and that we're not telling federal law enforcement officials what to do. We can't do that anyway because federal immigration law is federal law. And the enforcement of immigration law is a federal authority and jurisdiction. But we should not limit collaboration because public safety is public safety.

Those who are engaged in criminal activity in one area, often times are engaged in criminal activity in other areas. And so we should not be limiting collaboration with our federal partners. We should be encouraging more collaboration with our federal partners. And this bill moves us in the opposite direction. And really, this is a response to recent immigration enforcement activities and actions in our country.

And just because a certain administration is there, administrations change. In four years it'll be different. In eight years it'll be different. And again, we should not limit local law enforcement officers from having collaboration with federal immigration authority. No vote.

Representative Marten.

In support and I'd like to adopt the, words from the Judiciary Chair as if they were my own.

So ordered. Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, in support.

Please proceed.

And I would like.

Thank you. And I would like to insert the words of the Judiciary Chair's my own.

So ordered.

And I would also like permission to, insert written comments into the journal.

So ordered.

Thank you.

Representative Garcia. For the second time.

Second time and I'd like I'd also like to adopt the words of the Rep from Moanalua as my own.

So ordered. Representative Kila.

Reservations, Madam Speaker.

So ordered. Moving on to Standing Committee Report 2036. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise in support with reservations.

Please proceed.

Thank you. I support this bill because it ensures a greater access to certain medical services for people who actually may need it.

It provides them choice. However, my reservations that this bill is that this bill gives the Department of Health new authority to quote, Issue standing orders regarding immunizations. However, it does not define or limit the breadth of what those standing orders can say. Currently, the Department of Health must promulgate Hawaii administrative rules concerning immunizations, which requires community input. But issuing standing orders starts sounding more like the unilateral authority, more similar to an Executive Order of the governor.

I hope that limiting and clarifying language will be inserted into the bill during conference committee. Thank you.

Representative Garcia.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you Madam Speaker. This bill is a response to recent actions on the federal level by our new secretary of health and human services and our other federal health agencies CDC, HHS, etcetera. I believe that the current actions being taken are positive actions for our country. I believe that the reason why many of the vaccines were pulled from from the list of recommendations is not because of quack science, but simply because of the lack of testing for certain vaccinations over a long period of time.

And so just because changes occur on the federal level, no matter what administration or or party has control, that should be based on science.

And so for those reasons, no vote to this bill. And also, I would like to agree with the points that of the previous speaker that this bill establishes new powers to the Department of Health which I don't support. No vote.

Representative Kila.

Reservations, Madam Speaker.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to also acknowledge the reservations and comments made by the representative from Kaka'ako. I

Would you like to adopt her words?

No. I just wanted to acknowledge those words. Thank you, Madam Speaker. The concern about this bill, Madam speakeS, I think people remember the Covid shutdowns and government ruling and interventions that greatly affected one's personal freedoms in questionable ways.

Many of the same people who showed up for HB 1117 last session to oppose government mandates or authority that was similarly debatable are those same people among many others that are very concerned that this bill gives the Department of Health unilateral power that can repeat Covid's precedent.

Patient rights of bodily autonomy, my body, my choice, and informed consent can be violated without adequate oversight, transparency, or public consideration.

Additionally, the Department of Commerce and Consumer Protection noted in their testimony that it is unclear whether the amendments of this bill would trigger the deferral requirements under code excuse me, under 45 code of federal requirements CFR, under the Affordable care act, if a state mandates benefits that are in addition to the essential health benefits you find in the state's benchmark plan, the state is required to defray the cost of those additional benefits.

This means the state would be responsible for paying the additional premium cost for those benefits for all individuals enrolled in qualified health plans sold on the exchange. The department notes the increased risk of the United States Department of Health and Human Services proposed rule for 2027, which expands the criteria for state mandated benefits requiring state deferral to include any requirement enacted after 2011 that is not otherwise federally mandated. So based on this, Madam Speaker, I am asking that we defer this bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Moving on to 2037. Oh, Representative Takayama.

Madam Speaker, in support.

On 2036

Yes.

Please proceed.

Just wanted to note that the underlying and the real purpose of this bill is to ensure that vaccinations that adults choose to undertake for themselves and or their children are covered by our health insurance plans. And and and as previous speakers have noted, there is uncertainty, in the Federal Government as to which bodies will recommend which vaccinations. This makes it clear that the prevailing medical standards shall, be determined by our department of health at the local level. Thank you very much.

Representative Matsumoto.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Permission to insert written comments into the journal.

So ordered. Thank you. Moving on to Standing Committee Report 2037. Representative Garcia.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise in strong opposition to Senate bill twenty four eighteen. Let's be clear about what this bill actually does madam speaker, because the title and intent language tries to soften the content of the bill. This is not just about harm reduction. This is not just about public health.

The bill goes far beyond that. This bill fully legalizes drug paraphernalia in Hawaii. And that matters. Because under current law, possession of drug paraphernalia is already decriminalized. It's not a crime.

There is no jail time. At most, it's a minor violation with a small fine. That's current law. So the argument that that we must decriminalize the issue is simply not grounded in reality. That has already been done in previous legislatures.

What this bill does is something very different. It moves It removes the guard rails entirely. The AG has raised serious concerns about this bill, and I believe we should be listening to those concerns. Under this bill, we would be repealing felony protections that exist today to protect Hawaii's keiki. Right now, it's a class b felony for an adult to provide drug paraphernalia to a minor.

This bill eliminates that. An adult could give a child the tools to use meth, crack, cocaine, heroine, or other hard drugs. And it would no longer be a felony. It would also be be repealing the prohibition on advertising drug paraphernalia. That means open promotion, marketing, and yes, targeting.

Not just to adults, but inevitably reaching Hawaii's youth. The Hawaii county prosecutor made it very clear that this bill opens the door to normalizing drug use. And worse exposing minors to it in ways we currently prohibit. And for what? Because the public health justification doesn't hold up either.

We already have a syringe exchange program, which I disagree with. We already allow access to sterile needles which disagree with. We already provide immunity for participants in those programs. Those protections already exist. So this bill is not filling a gap, it's removing boundaries that were intentionally put in place.

And let's talk about the broader impact. When you legalize the tools for drug use, you are not operating in a vacuum. You are lowering the barrier to entry. You are normalizing drug behavior that we should be discouraging. And you're strengthening the demand of the illegal drug market which ultimately benefits traffickers and dealers.

More access, more normalization, more drug use in Hawaii's communities. And yet this body continues down a path that I struggle to understand. Time and time again, we're presented with bills that lower the standard, that remove accountability, and that move us further away from public safety. Honolulu Police Department opposes this bill. Hawaii Attorney General opposes this bill.

The very people tasked with keeping our communities safe are telling us, again, this is bad policy. And we're still considering it. It's not compassion. It's not balanced, and it's certainly not common sense. This this bill modeled after mainland progressive policies that have failed time and time again, and we should not be importing those failures into our state.

We do not want more drug activity in our communities. We want less drug activity. We don't want to normalize drug use or drug culture. We wanna restore accountability to protect Hawaii's families. Madam speaker, this bill sends the wrong message to users, to families, and to Hawaii's next generation.

And I cannot and will not support it. I urge my colleagues to use common sense and not normalize drug use. No vote.

Representative Matsumoto.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

And if I can have the words of the previous speaker inserted into the journal as if they were my own.

So ordered. Thank you. Representative Muraoka.

Same request, please.

So ordered. Representative Gedeon.

Same request, please.

So ordered. Representative Alcos.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Hawaii has already taken meaningful steps in this area. In 2017, our our legislature, we reduced simple paraphernalia possession from a felony to a violation. This was a balanced approach. One that acknowledged the issue without fully removing accountability.

This bill goes much further and I believe we should not proceed down that path. Finally, I believe we should consider the broader message we are sending. Full repeal may signal that we, the legislature, our state, is normalizing drug use infrastructure without ensuring the safeguards, treatment capacity, and recovery support necessary to address the root problem. Members, this is not about rejecting compassion. It is about ensuring that policy is balanced, effective, and responsible.

So ordered. And I would close with saying for these reasons, I respectfully urge a no vote. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, I would also, request that the words of the minority floor leader be inserted as my own.

Representative Tarnas.

In support.

Please proceed.

Thank you. Your judiciary and Hawaiian affairs committee is moving this bill out because it is compassionate. It is focused on harm reduction. It is focused on helping those who are addicted to drugs to get treatment. Substance abuse is a health problem.

Criminalizing it doesn't solve the problem. This measure reduces penalties that can discourage people from seeking healthcare, harm reduction services, or overdose prevention support while keeping limits on equipment used for drug manufacturing. It aims to shift the response more towards safety and treatment and less toward punishment for people who use drugs because they have a health problem.

This bill could help people seek help sooner by reducing penalties tied to items used for drug use, which can make people less afraid to access health care, overdose prevention, and harm reduction services. This bill keeps restrictions on any items used to make illegal drugs while supporting a more health focused response for people who use drugs.

It can help prevent overdoses and, and help prevent the spread of infectious diseases while encouraging treatment and connection to services. We need to recognize that substance abuse is a reality in our community. We should not turn our back on these members of our community who are our constituents. We need to help them find treatment. Yes, we do need to support treatment services and expand those.

Absolutely. But we need to remove the barriers for those who have substance abuse problems so that they can actually get that treatment. This bill achieves that and I urge Members to support it. Thank you.

Representative Shimizu.

Thank you Madam Speaker. Opposition second time. I'd like to,

Please proceed.

Thank you. I'd like to, acknowledge and, give my respects to the Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Chair. I agree that we need to help people who are not able to help themselves. My argument would be that if we were are really serious about showing compassion and addressing and helping these people, then we should be funding them, funding programs and nonprofits, increasing services that really addresses the problem in a focused and increased measure.

And that that's my my concern is that we we can pass these bills, Madam Speaker, with with great intentions.

But unless we really get to the root of the problem by by funding specific solutions that are working and are are already, short staffed and underfunded, Programs that are are showing results helping people. Those are the things that that we need to do as a body. So, that that's my position and I thank you. I wanna thank you Madam Speaker.

Representative Garcia.

In opposition, second time.

Please proceed.

Thank you Madam Speaker. The Chair of the Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs committee says that this bill is compassionate. It's not a compassionate bill. This is insanity. It's lunacy to think that legalizing crack pipes and meth pipes and syringes filled with paraphernalia is compassionate.

I don't I just don't get that. Being raised in a community where this substance abuse was prevalent, I can guarantee you that families who are impacted by this crap does not agree with this. Substance abuse is a reality, he says. Of course it's a reality. And he also says that this bill will help people get further treatment.

Madam Speaker, they can get treatment without a crack pipe. No vote.

Moving on to Standing Committee Report. Representative Alcos.

In opposition.

So ordered. Please proceed.

This bill would you know, they say that we're gonna seek counseling or get more help or maybe get medicine for more help. But then again, we're dealing with chronics on our street, and they have one mission in mind, trying to supply their needs with the bad medicine, with drugs, and they're gonna still forget that money. How are we gonna keep our community safe? How are we gonna keep our people safe in our community?

Because right now, to today, they can't get help right now as it is, but they're not seeking for the help.

They're not looking right now for that extra support that they can have. All they're looking for is how to get high the next day. And that's their mission in coming and get high. How are we gonna protect our community when we're making this when we're letting them out, and if they go out and steal and shoot somebody, or kill somebody, or hurt somebody, or mob your grandma for their purse or their money.

We're making it more easy for them because, really, it's gonna be soft on crime and not much, and we're not protecting our community. So in opposition.

Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. With reservations, and can I have the words of the Judiciary Chair entered into the record as my own?