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.

Will the House come to order? Representative Kahaloa.

Madam Speaker, I move to adopt Standing Committee Reports listed on pages 23 through 31 and that the accompanying Senate Bills as may be amended past third reading. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any discussion on these items beginning with HSCR number 2064. Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support with reservations and a brief comment.

Please proceed.

This bill is titled relating to harbor safety. It repeals the sunset provision of act two three six from session laws 2024, thereby making permanent the requirement that Department of Transportation ensure that the securing of mooring lines from vessels to commercial docks, wharves, piers, keys, and landings be performed by labor subject to collective bargaining. So while I support harbor safety and I support collective- those workers who are protected by collective bargaining.

This bill, as it moved through six committees, committee hearings, had only two pieces of testimony, both in opposition. No government agency, no union provided testimony testimony stating that because we're requiring we required mooring lines to be secured by labor subject to collective bargaining, that we had less injuries, better on time performance, less property damage.

We are removing a sunset to a pilot program that has not demonstrated that it has achieved the outcomes of the original 2024 act. In fact, when I went back to look at the testimony back in 2024, the Hawaii Department of Transportation stated in its testimony, H E O T may ask vessel owners and agents to affirm that this requirement is met, but lacks the resources necessary to investigate or enforce a lack for lack of, compliance.

My district has Kewala Basin and other state peers, and there are many small business owners who run these commercial fishing, boats. They're small they're owned by family businesses or maybe employee owned businesses. Those workers who jump off the vessel to moor the line, A lot of them are not, unionized labor.

And so this would be very complicated, I think, to enforce, and it's a little bit, like it doesn't kind of make sense to to have a law that we just refuse to enforce. Thank you.

Representative Shimizu.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I agree with, the reservations that the, vice chair of, public safety just expressed. This bill repeals the current 07/01/2028 sunset date for act 236, making permanent the requirement for DOT to ensure that the securing of mooring lines from vessels to commercial docks wars piers and landings be performed by labor subject to collective bargaining. Madam speaker, I come from a union company and industry. So I know the value of union labor.

But I will share and paraphrase from testimony from activities and attractions association of Hawaii as, the previous speaker noted was, I think, the singular test testifier, which speaks of the great challenges of doing business in Hawaii. This bill adds regulatory burden, cost, and inefficiency to doing business in Hawaii. In some locations, union labor may not always be available, causing delays which affects efficiency and profitability. Again, it goes back to cost of living being the number one issue in our state.

Many businesses have trained and qualified personnel to safely assist with this scope, and a blanket mandate unnecessarily blocks them from doing this work safely and freely.

I agree, safety is paramount. And if so, safety should be driven by competence and accountability, not by a one size fits all labor restriction. With cost of living being the number one issue in our state, this kind of arrangement that mandates and restricts free choice and enterprise perpetuates entrenched cost factors and work against providing flexible options and solutions for these businesses.

At a time when Hawaii continues to struggle with affordability and high operating costs, the state should, we should avoid policies that increase expenses and create bottlenecks in the in essential harbor operations. With the July 2028 sunset sunset date, there is still time to analyze this issue more carefully.

I respectfully ask that we defer this measure. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Standing committee re representative Kila.

In support, Madam Speaker.

Please proceed.

Madam Speaker, this bill before the legislature allows us to codify what is currently a sunset law. Madam speaker, our state harbor is operated by our state facilities, and it is imperative that we continue to monitor these ports with efficacy and safety. Make sure that we continue to monitor these ports with efficacy and safety.

Making sure that this bill is enacted allows us to continue safety and monitoring to allow our cargos and good to come into the state securely by making sure that there are no bad actors coming into these ports. Oahu is the busiest port in the state, madam speaker, but all our ports across the state are compliant with this law.

Largely what we are trying to accomplish is making sure that safety continues to be number one priority, and the folks working in our areas of state jurisdiction continue to be state certified employees. So for those reasons, I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Representative Todd.

In support.

Please proceed.

I just wanted to note that the transportation chair from 2024 initially had this applied very broadly, and that was a mistake. So I'm glad that last year's transportation chair actually fixed this, and this bill does not currently apply to any government owned or government sponsored vessels, tour boats, training vessels, or fishing vessels. Thank you.

Representative Poepoe.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Gedeon.

Reservations, please.

So ordered. Representative Souza.

In support, Madam Speaker, is the brief comment?

Please proceed.

You know, back in 2024, act 236 came about due to House Bill 1936. At the time, the ILW submitted testimony and support, and there a lot of testimony. There was over 71 pieces of testimony at the time for this particular measure.

And the ILW used to been testimony and support, and one of the things that they said that resonated with me was that this particular measure proposed a responsible solution by mandating the involvement of Hawaii based safety certified stevedoring companies. These companies employ highly skilled experienced local longshore workers who possess the intimate knowledge of Hawaiian waters and mooring practices crucial for minimizing accidents and ensuring optimal safety. As with any stevadoring job, mooring operations carry significant risks and accidents have devastating consequences even death.

But this particular testimony and many of the pieces of testimony and support are the reasons why I'm in support of, this particular measure that we have here before us today and making this permanent. Thank you.

Moving on to Standing Committee Report 2066, 2070. Representative Souza.

Let me go back to 2066, Madam Speaker.

Okay. Let's finish up with 2070. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support with reservation.

Please proceed.

Madam Speaker, I have observed a few measures addressing the construction process, focusing on the permitting process. I I'd like to acknowledge the good and important work of the economic development and technology chair as he chairs the speed task force.

And I would hope that any related bills would be reviewed and coordinated with this task force so that we would work in a coordinated and efficient manner. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Cochran.

Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. I rise with reservations and.

Please proceed.

With comment. Yeah. Thank you so much. So I had, spoke to OPSD a little bit and also I put word out to the counties. Unfortunately, I didn't get any feedback there yet, but just for me, it looks very cumbersome and very labor intensive for, in particular, Lahaina and its rebuilding. So that's my main reasons for with reservations on this measure. Thank you.

Okay. Let's move back to 2066. Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, with reservations.

So ordered. Moving on to 2071. Representative Iwamoto.

Reservations.

So ordered. We're at the top of page 24, Standing Committee Report 2072. Representative Kila.

Madam Speaker, reservations and permission to insert written comments.

So ordered. Thank you. 2073. Representative Shimizu.

Reservations, please.

So ordered. 2075, 2076. Representative Kila.

Reservations, Madam Speaker.

So ordered. Representative Reyes Oda.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. At first glance, this bill is presented as a technical update to modernize our penal code. But when you look closer, this is not a simple cleanup bill. This is a simp, a sweeping overhaul of our criminal justice system with dozens of substantive changes bundled together into one measure. I'm I'm just concerned about, any unintended consequences that affect our public safety, Madam Speaker.

And, that's my main concern in opposing this bill. Thank you.

Representative Tarnas.

In support.

Please proceed.

Thank you. This measure is the result of very hard work by the 2020 five advisory committee on penal code review, which was appointed by the chief justice, former chief justice Recktenwald. And it consisted of 61 members from a diverse cross section of the community affected by criminal laws in Hawaii.

Not only legislators are, are represented on this committee, but also 16 jurists representing all courts and all four judicial circuits, prosecutors from all counties, the department of attorney general, lawyers from the public defender's office and the private defense bar, medical professionals from the Department of Health and the governor's office, law enforcement officers, advocates for victims' rights, advocates for prisoners' rights, the director of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and interested members of the public advocacy groups and government staff.

These recommendations are the consensus of this process.

They these are folks who are professionals. They've considered what the consequences are. And as your chair of judiciary in Hawaiian affairs committee, I wanted to honor that process this bill out because I believe that what they have suggesting here will improve our criminal justice system.

In the words of the judiciary, they say that the revisions proposed will facilitate faster mental examination of defendants, minimize the time between court decisions, leverage the medical treatment already afforded to these to this defendant population, and ultimately reduce the length of stay by defendants at the Hawaii State Hospital. The proposals seek to modernize and expedite the transfer of information and patients between the Department of Health and the department of corrections and rehabilitation.

And the significant revisions will expedite the transfer of defendants out of the state hospital, especially when there is no dispute that a defendant is fit to proceed and should be returned to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for further criminal proceedings. This measure is very carefully crafted by this committee and the judiciary and Hawaiian affairs committee supports the efforts of the twenty twenty five advisory committee on penal code review and I urge all Members to support this measure. Thank you, Speaker.

Representative Cochran.

I rise, in opposition. Thank you.

So ordered.

Moving on to Standing Committee Report 2075. I'm sorry. That was we're at the actually the top of page 25. 2077. Representative Cochran.

No vote.

So ordered. 2078. Representative Cochran.

No vote.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, the original intent of this bill was to ensure that awarded contracts have sufficient funding and if exceeded the 10% threshold, it needs to be approved by the chief procurement officer. In a JHH hearing from the state procurement office testimony, Hawaii administrative rules already imposes limitations on contract increases.

It states that an amendment to a contract that would change the original scope of the contract or increase the original contract price by 10% or more may only be made with the approval of the chief procurement officer. Therefore, this bill is not necessary because of stated rules already in place that accomplish this.

Also note that SD1 added blank funding appropriations for a plus one full time position, which was not part of the original ask and is directing funds to something already being handled by this office. The last thing this original bill intended was to repeal criminal penalties in the Hawaii procurement code, thereby requiring penalties to be imposed through administrative processes. Note that the current bill includes criminal penalty stating, a person shall be subject to prosecution for a misdemeanor in cases of egregious violations of the procurement code.

So the introducers intent of the bill, first to safeguard any contract amendment that exceeds 10% of the base amount is already accomplished with administrative rules. Second, changing criminal penalties to administrative ones is not being accomplished.

And third, we are now adding cost and percent personnel that was not requested. So it seems to me, madam speaker, that this measure this measure as it now stands is is not beneficial or essential, and we don't need to appropriate funds here. Therefore, I ask my colleagues to defer this measure. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

2079. Representative Garcia.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Madam Apeaker, I oppose the previous bill on House bill version of this. This bill requires a person who applies for an ID or a driver's license to be automatically registered to vote unless the person affirmatively declines. What will this bill do? This bill is not establishing automatic voter registration. Hawaii already has that and we've had it for some years.

But I believe the current process suffices, and that is when you go and get your driver's license or an ID, you have to conscientiously check a box saying, I want to get registered to vote. It should remain that way. It gives the individual the liberty to make that decision. This bill flips that around and now says, you have to conscientiously say, I don't want to.

Now, how many people who fill out applications are just speeding through things because they're in a rush to get their driver's license or ID.

They're there at the DMV not caring about voting. They're there to get their driver's license. And many people would just skip over that because it's not required, and they'll automatically be registered to vote, which means thousands and thousands of new mail ballots being sent across Hawaii for people who didn't really request them. That's not good policy. Bad bill. No vote.

Representative Shimizu.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm I'm supportive of registering more people to vote, But the critical component of voting rights is being a legal citizen, which this bill would accomplish via self attestation. Just checking the box on a form. With voting being the bedrock of our democracy. For me, this is not exacting enough and easily allows unlawful or even mistaken voting rights.

In addition, we really need to do a thorough thorough cleaning of our voter rolls even before such, measure gets put in place. So with these serious concerns, madam speaker, I move that we defer this bill. Thank you.

Representative Cochran.

With reservations.

So ordered.

And if time permits, Madam Speaker, if we can revisit SCR 272, SB 2041. I wanted to register a no vote with comments.

What number is that?

Sorry. SCR2072. Okay. SB

At the appropriate time, we will go back to that.