Senate Standing Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection

Good morning and welcome to the Hawaii State Senate Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection. It's Thursday, 04/16/2026. This is our 09:30am committee hearing agenda in Conference Room 229 at the Hawaii State Capitol. We are hearing a number of governor's messages which proposed members of boards and commissions for consideration and confirmation by the Senate. This meeting is being streamed live on YouTube.

I'd like to thank everyone for their patience and understanding. Because all of you are being supported, nominees are being supported by friends, family, and colleagues, Although it was not required, we elected to reschedule the hearing on Friday to today to allow everyone the opportunity to do what they needed to do with their families and come back another day. So thank you very much for accommodating that and we'll move forward.

If we do need to abruptly end this meeting, well, which is being streamed live to reconvene at a later date, that date will be Friday, 04/17/2026 at 09:30am in this Conference Room 229 and a notice will be posted on the legislature's website. This is a ninety minute hearing time slot and our customary practice in the Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee is to ask that testifiers observe a two minute speaking limit.

We have received everyone's written testimony. It's been posted and made available on the legislative website and we've reviewed it. If You'd like to take your time to elaborate or add any additional comments, feel free to do so. But if you'd also like to just stand on your testimony and recognize your presence, make yourself available for questions, then please feel free. We'll be calling the list of individuals online and in the room, so please just stand by.

If you're online, your audio will be muted and video disabled until it's your turn, and then we'll try and accommodate you if there are technical difficulties. So let's get started. The first nominee is governor's message five zero five, Timmy Hirano for consideration to the board of dentistry for a term to expire 06/30/2029. Chrissy Hooglin from the board of dentistry and support.

My name is Chrissy Hooglin, I am the executive officer for the board of dentistry, the board stands on its testimony and support.

Hooglin? Hooglin, yep. Thank you very much. Melissa Pavosek for the Hawaii Dental Association in support, and Norman Chun in support. Is there anyone else who would like to testify?

Okay. Mister Hirono, we have you online. Good morning.

Good morning. I'll just stand by my written testimonies.

Okay. Great. Thank you very much for making yourself available and for stepping forward to serve. Members, are there any questions from the nominee?

Okay. Very impressive.

Mister Hirano, thank you very much. We'll move on. Okay. Next nominee is governor's message 577 Leo Williams for consideration to the board of barbering and cosmetology for term to expire 06/30/2029. We have Nate DiNando, Director of DCCA and Support.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay. Mister Williams, good morning.

Or yeah. Hello. Thank you. I've been participating in the board since August, and I stand on my testimony.

K. Thank you very much. Thank you for making yourself available and stepping forward to serve. Members, any questions for the nominee? Okay, we'll move on.

Thank you very much again for making yourself available. Next is GM five seventy nine, Julie Tanabegu to the board of dentistry

ceremony.

Thank you very much. We also have written testimony, all in support from the Hawaii Dental Association. Stephen Kumasaka, Mark Sumikawa, Karen Hu, Robert Sherman, Brett Roofs, and Jane Lilly. Is there anyone else who would like to testify?

Okay,

if not, I believe, we have the, Ms. Gu. Go ahead, good morning.

Good morning, I'd like to stand by my written testimonies.

Okay, Thank you very much for also making yourself available to serve and, to attend today. Members, any questions? Vice chair.

You know, in your responses to the, committee's questions, you did point out some of your prior experience and background with, patients, you know, dealing with Medicaid and, various, challenges in that arena. Have you seen or do you anticipate seeing further challenges, especially in this kind of year of transition, you know, as we try and navigate some of the federal reductions and impacts on our Hawaii insured population?

I would like to collaborate with the board if any of those questions or concerns come up. Being in private practice for over thirty years, I feel that I know private practice patients working at HDS and working with insurance companies. We're all in this together. So I think a lot of this would come down to communication between all.

Okay. Well, it wasn't so much, you know, in, in terms of the board's operations, but more from what you are seeing or anticipate, you know, as we are moving forward in 2026. It's been quite a turbulent year with respect to health care issues and involving a number of organizations that are seeking assistance from the DCCA's insurance division. So I'm just kind of looking to see whether or not in the dental arena, you know, some of these concerns have also materialized. Thank you.

Okay. Members, any other questions? Okay. If not, thank you very much for making yourself available. We'll move on to the next nominee.

Governor's message five eight five, Kristen Baba, to the board of speech pathology and Audiology for a term to expire 06/30/2029. Christopher Fernandez, executive officer DCCA board of speech pathology and Audiology in support.

Hello, chair and members of the committee. My name is Ted Torres, one of the executive officers at DCCA.

I just apologize. My sorry. My video is not working, but I'm here.

Thank you very much. We also have written testimony in support from the Pacific Islands Healthcare System, VA Pacific Islands Healthcare System, Hawaii Audiology Consultants, Lauren Horican, Katrina Liner, Brian Chen, Rhee Chen, Alexandra Morgan, and Denby Raul. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay. Do we have the nominee?

Okay. If you'd like to make a statement, please go ahead.

Stand by my written testimony.

Okay. Thank you for making yourself available. Are there any questions for the nominee or any of the or the board? Okay, if not thank you very much, we'll move on. Next nominee is Governor's Message five eighty eight, Michael Stebner.

For consideration to the Motor Vehicle Industry Licensing Board, term to expire 06/30/2029. Hector West, Executive Officer for DCCA Board of Motor Vehicle Industry, in support.

Hello chair members of the committee. I'm Hector West, the executive officer of the Motor Vehicle Industry. The board stands on its written testimony in support. Thank you.

Thank you very much. We also have testimony in support from the Hawaii Automobile Dealers Association. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay, seeing none, I believe we have the nominee online. Good morning.

Yes, good morning.

If you'd like to introduce yourself and make a statement, feel feel free. Yeah.

No. I'm Michael Stoebner. I'm just, you know, intending to get approved.

Thank you very much for

Thank you.

Making yourself available. Any questions? The nominee? No? Okay, thank you very much.

We'll move on.

Thank you.

Next nominee is governor's message 693. Alan Martin to the Elevator Mechanics Licensing Board for a term to expire 06/30/2028. Board of Elevator Mechanics in support.

The board stands on, we can't stand on in support. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay. Do we have Mr. Martin?

Yes.

Oh, yeah. Would you like to make a statement?

Well, I'm gonna know.

If you're gonna do beyond standing on your testimony, then I'd ask you to just come up and briefly speak into the mic so that the feed can catch you.

I'll sit. Okay.

No worries. Not a requirement to speak.

I've I've been with boards.

You but if you're gonna speak, then you gotta speak into the mic because we are live on YouTube, and the people in the Internet Here. Cannot hear. Yeah. If you can just come up. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yes. I've been on the board since towards the ending of COVID, and I stand on my written testimony.

Okay. Thank you very much for coming today and stepping forward to serve.

A little uncomfortable.

I understand. Yeah. We try to make it easy, but it's not always. So any questions? Yeah.

I don't need to ask you questions. Thank you for coming. We'll move on. Governor's Message 697 Richard Ann Marie for consideration to the real estate commission term to expire 06/30/2030. Let me see here.

Okay, Derek Yamane, chair of the Hawaii real estate commission in support. Thank you very much. Phil Nerni in support. Dallas Walker in support online.

Not present, chair.

K. Thank you. Gregory Masakian in opposition online.

Not present either, chair.

Thank you. Sandy Wong in support.

Not present either, chair.

Online. Okay. We also have testimony in support from Mitchell Emanaca, David Levi, Dale Head in opposition, Lila Moore in opposition, Jonathan Billings in support. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay, mister Emery.

Yes.

Good morning.

Good morning, chair, vice chair, committee members.

Would you like to introduce yourself and make a statement?

My name is Richard Emery. I'm a 52 year resident of Hawaii. I'm a 38 year real estate broker, and my experience is general brokerage, rental management, which could be land or tenant code issues, condominium management. And I currently provide con continuing education courses, both core and elective courses to real estate agents in Hawaii. I'm just completing my four year term and the real estate commission.

I feel it's a public duty and a personal duty to provide support to our government as well as to nonprofits. So I'm looking forward to hopefully another confirmation or another four year term.

Thank you, members. Questions? Vice chair.

Thank you, mister Emery, for stepping forward. You know, in recent years, there's been a lot of contentiousness within the condo arena. And so I know that the opposition testimony that was filed, you know, with our committee does reflect one instance of a particular property, which your company your prior company was responsible for managing.

And in that particular instance, the testify I mean, the person who submitted the testimony claimed that the property manager sort of did not disclose, you know, the true nature of what was actually going to be imposed on the condo owners. And, of course, many of them were very upset.

In your role at the Real Estate Commission, you know, how do you see the commission serving as a bridge between resolving some of these kinds of individual condo owner complaints as well as working with the management companies and the insurance industry.

Well, I think, you know, I just gave

a seminar for the, Property Management Expo here in March at the place. It was entitled Hawaii condos under attack. Is reform necessary? And what we need to do in the real estate commission is gather more factual evidence is as you may suspect, for every side, there's two sides. And the presentation that mister Head wrote is a description of what happened.

I sold that business in 1992, so we're going back 15 years ago. So I don't have a lot of memory, but I can say this in general practice. When associations have reserve funding issues, one of the common methods are is to borrow the money to fix the building, which they have a statutory obligation to do. And that means someone has to pay for the loan, and usually that results in an increase in the maintenance fees to pay for the loan.

I think the Real Estate Commission needs to look at all the information they have available to them from the mediations, the arbitrations, the complaints, and get a factual database on the extent of the problem because these anecdotal hearsay stories don't necessarily represent the actual facts.

I am very committed. I have spoken to the people who are opposed to my nomination of an open door to talk about issues, as you know from the task force, to talk about the issues before our industry and come forward with common sense, practical ways to protect the consumer.

Okay. Well, I think the the benefit, you know, of having this, ongoing discussion at the Real Estate Commission as well as in the task force is to identify ways that additional information and education can be provided to individual owners. Because oftentimes, I think in the past, a lot of people relied upon their AOAO boards, you know, to manage the decisions affecting their property. And in today's times, we're finding that that's not always adequate. So I'm glad that, you know, we're kind of looking towards ways to

I support expanding communication and education for Board Members

Okay.

To a certain level recognizing some condos are only two units and some are a thousand unit, and one size doesn't fit all.

Absolutely. But I think in terms of, you know, finding ways to, make it a lot more meaningful for owners to be able to resolve areas of disagreement is going to be important.

I agree with you, on that.

Okay. Thank you.

Any other questions? Okay. Thank you very much.

Thanks, all of you.

And we'll move on.

To governor's message six ninety eight, Trinette Culley for a term to expire 06/30/2030. Director Renee DiNondo for DCCA in support.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Senator McElwee. Scanner has written testimony in support of the nomination of Ms. Cowley's Children for the State Commission.

Thank you very much. We also have written testimony from Derek Kaukami, mayor of Kauai, Kristen Faulkner, White Stark Foundation, George Morvus, Hawaii Resource Strategy Group, all in support. Following individuals in support, Claudia Shea, Michael Robinson for Hawaii Pacific Health, Janai Hart for Aloha Sofis International Realty, Lawrence Starner, Contractors Association of Kauai, Sean Smith, Michelle Sunahara Lautermilk, Sonia Tapenio, Tom Shigemoto, Oriana Skomoric, Karen Pilz, Randall He, Denton Wong, Lila Moore, and Scott Sato. Is there anyone else who would like to testify?

Okay, seeing none, we have the nominee online.

Good morning.

Good morning, chair and vice chair, members of the committee. My name is Trinette Kaui from the island Of Kauai, and I stand by my written testimony, and I'm here if you have any questions.

Thank you very much. Members, any questions? No. Okay. Thank you very much for making yourself available.

Thank you. Okay. Aloha.

Aloha. The next nominee is Frank Gadell, governor's message six nine nine for consideration to the real estate commission for a term to expire 06/30/2030. DCCA Hawaii real estate commission in support. Thank you very much. We also have written testimony in support from Richard Emery, Lindsay Garcia, and James Worley.

Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay. Would the nominee like to make a statement?

I'll stand on the testimony.

Okay. Thank you very much for joining us this morning. Members any questions? Okay, thank you very much, we'll move on to governor's message seven fourteen, Andrea Ushijima. Also for consideration to the real estate commission term to expire 06/30/2030.

Director Rondo in support. Thank you very much. We also have following individuals all in support, John Love, Michelle Loudermilk, Sherry Martin, and David Rare. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay.

Do we have the nominee online? Oh, she's in the room. Hello. Good morning.

Good morning, chair, vice chair, and members of the committee. My name is Andrea Ushijima, and I am an attorney. I've been practicing for over twelve years in the areas of real estate and finance, and I stand by my testimony. Do you have any questions?

Yeah. Members' questions? Okay. Thank you very much for joining us. Okay.

We'll move to the next nominee, governor's message seven eighteen. John Paul Velasquez to the board of naturopathic medicine for a term to expire 06/30/2030. DCCA in support.

It's the morning that DCCA stands up for the testimonies of the East Foundation to the board of the National Capital. Yes.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay. We have the nominee online. Good morning.

Good morning. I'd like to stand on my written testimony and happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much for joining us. Is there members any questions for the nominee? Okay. There are no questions. Thank you for making yourself available.

Thank you.

Okay. Next nominee is governor's message seven nineteen. Corinne Maldesoto to the board of naturopathic medicine for a term to expire 06/30/2030. DCCA in support. Thank you very much.

We also have Rachel Klein in support. Michael Lawrence in support and Britta Zimmer in support. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay, and do we have the nominee?

Not present on Zoom, chair.

Thank you very much. Okay. Members, any questions for the DCCA director? She's the only testifier present. Okay.

Then we'll move on to Governor's Message 720. Robyn Jumawan for consideration to the state boxing commission. Term to expire 06/30/2030. Justin Joe, DCCA Boxing Commission in support. Good morning.

Thank you very much. We also have written testimony in support from Eiji Jumawan, Kalei Tringale, and Miles Eno. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay, Mrs. Jumawan.

Hello. I'm Robyn Jumawan, and I'd like to stand on my testimony and be available for questions if you have any.

Thank you very much. Any questions members? No. Vice chair.

You know, the, I guess, mixed martial arts and boxing arena has undergone a lot of changes in the last few years, and this is kind of the reappointment to the Boxing Commission. Can you kind of briefly talk about some of your experiences during the first yers of service?

Yes, I can. I'm happy to say that, we have been working on updating the statutes. We're making progress on that. And as far as the MMA, addition, you know, we're still working on that as well.

But, we've had a lot of, you know, group sessions and discussions, and I think everybody is pretty much, on the same page that this would be a a good idea. And we've also made progress in getting the amateur boxing, National Headquarters to, kinda take over with the rules. So because they have a really good rule system and administrative system. And so, we've delegated that to them with our oversight. And so that's a big, progression that I've seen.

Okay. Well, thank you very much. We appreciate your service.

Thank you. It's an honor.

Members, questions? Thank you for joining us this morning and for stepping forward to serve.

Thank you.

Okay. We'll move on to the next nominee. Governor's Message 721 Dan Hirota to the Board of Professional Engineers, Architects, Surveyors, and Landscape Architects for a term to expire 06/30/2030. Eli Lane, executive officer of the board in support. Thank you very much.

We also have written testimony in support from Kevin Katayama, Howard Kon Sim Lau, Tony Lau, and Joel Korokawa. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay. Mister Hirota.

Morning. I'll just stand on my testimony.

Okay. Members, any questions? Okay. Seeing none, thank you for joining us this morning. Next nominee is Governor's Message 745 Elizabeth Ignacio for confirmation to the Hawaii medical board.

Term to expire 06/30/2030. Doctor Lewin, State Health Planning Development Agency in support.

Yes. I just wanna thank you, Jack Lewin, Shepherd Administrator. I this is an incredibly qualified person. She's board certified surgeon, diagnostic interventional radiologist. She may be overqualified for the position, but she she's an amazing physician leader here.

She's president of the Hawaii Medical Association last year. She's past president now. She's also an activist. She lives on Maui, but she works in Maui and Kauai. She understands the rural health issues.

And she'll be a powerful member of the medical board, and one a person who really is respected by all of her peers. So an amazing qualified person.

Thank you very much. Elizabeth Kaur, DCCA, Hawaii Medical Board in support. Thank you very much. We also have, Nadine Tansal from the Hawaii Medical Association in support. Jennifer Deisman, Menjivar VP at HMSN in support.

Leighton Pang, Doctor. Christina Marzo, both in support. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay, Doctor. Ignacio, we have you online.

Good morning. Good morning. Aloha. Good morning, chair, vice chair, and committee members. I'll stand on my submitted statement and say that I'm deeply grateful for the opportunity and I hope that I have the honor to serve on Hawaii Medical Board. Thank you. Available for any questions.

Thank you very much. Members, any questions?

No.

Okay. Thank you very much again. We'll move on to the next nominee. Stacy Kiluginoy to the board of physical therapy, term to expire 06/30/2029. Adrian Stonardo, DCCA Board of Physical Therapy in support.

Thank you chair, the board of standards are testimonies.

Thank you very much. We also have Jonathan Ching of Kaiser Permanente in support. Okay, is there anyone else? Oh, I'm sorry, Kip Ochi in support. Okay, is there anyone else who would like to testify?

Okay. Do we have the nominee online?

Not present, Chair On Zoom.

Okay. Thank you. Members questions for the DCCA? Nope. Okay.

We'll move on. Thank you very much. The next nominee is governor's message. Seven sixty Brandon Rabang To the board of pharmacy turned to expire 06/30/2030. Board of pharmacy in support.

On behalf of Mamiko, executive officer, the voting is in support.

Thank you very much. Roland Taniguchi in support. Tiffany Yajima in support. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay.

We have the nominee online. Good morning.

Good morning, chair, vice chair, and members. This is Brandon Rabang. I'll stand up my written testimony and just say that, you know, over the past four years, I've had I've been a lot of experience, on regulatory oversight, policy development, addressing all the complex issues here in Hawaii, with the health care and telepharmacy and and different things impacting the folks here in Hawaii. And I remain committed to protecting the consumers and and serving another four years at your discretion. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Members, any questions for the nominee? Okay. If not, thank you very much for making yourself available and stepping forward to serve.

You're welcome.

We'll move on to governor's message. Seven seven six Rebecca Sawai for consideration to the Hawaii medical board, term to expire 06/30/2030. Hawaii medical board in support. Okay. Thank you.

Jonathan Ching from Kaiser Permanente in support. I skipped ahead earlier. I know he's on there.

Present On zoom, chair.

Good morning. Hi, chair. Sorry. Jonathan Ching for Kaiser Permanente. We'll stand on our written testimony in support of GM seven seven six, doctor Sawai, for a second, term to the Hawaii Medical Board. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay. If not, doctor Sawai, good morning.

Good morning. Thank you. Aye, stand on my written testimony. Thank you for the privilege of appearing here, and happy to ask answer any questions if there are any.

Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for the nominee? No. Okay.

Thank you very much for making yourself available. We'll take a short recess.

Thank you very much for making yourself available. We'll take a short recess.

Okay. Reconvening for decision making on this 09:30AM, Thursday, 04/16/2026, boards and commission agenda. Members the recommend I'm gonna read the recommendations on all the nominees and without objection, we're gonna take them in one motion.

So, the recommendations are as follows to advise and consent to the confirmation of all of the nominees on these agenda on this agenda short of governor's message five fourteen who we will take, thereafter the vote. So, again, the recommendation is to advise and consent to governor's message five zero five, Timmy Hirano to the board of dentistry, governor's message five seventy seven, Leo Williams to the board of barbering and cosmetology. Governor's message five seventy nine, Julie Tanabe Gu to the board of dentistry.

Governor's message five eighty five, Kristen Baba to the board of speech pathology and Audiology. Governor's message five eighty eight Michael Stebner to the Moore Vehicle Industry Licensing Board.

Governor's message six ninety three Alan Martin to the elevator mechanics licensing board. Governor's message six ninety seven Richard Amory to the real estate commission. Governor's message six ninety eight Trinit Kauai to the Real Estate Commission. Governor's message six ninety nine Frank Goodale to the Real Estate Commission. Governor's message seven one four Andrea Ushijima to the Real Estate Commission.

Governor's message seven eighteen, John Paul Velasquez to the board of naturopathic medicine. Governor's message seven nineteen, Kareem Maldesoto to the board of naturopathic medicine. Governor's message seven twenty Robin Jumawan to the boxing commission. Governor's message, seven twenty one, Dan Hirota to the Board of Professional Engineers, Architects, Surveyors and Landscape Architects. Governor's message, seven forty five Elizabeth Ignacio to the Hawaii Medical Board.

Governor's message seven fifty one Stacey Killeinoy to the board of physical therapy. And, governor's message seven sixty Brandon Rabang to the board of pharmacy. And governor's message seven seventy six Rebecca Sawai to the Hawaii medical board. Members, any discussion?

Chair. Senator McKelvey. Yes. I appreciate your recommendation. However, I have concerns.

So with that on GM697, I've received a lot of opposition and concerns, that the nominee may be very conflicted, so I will be not voting in support of the rising consent. Also, on 07/19 and on July, the nominees weren't weren't here today. And I'm concerned that if not being here for the first initial confirmation, the double have the time to be able to participate in on the board. So with that, those are my only dissension from your recommendation. Thank you, Bilam.

Your concerns are noted. I would note for the nominees that were not present today, they were asked to submit a questionnaire to the committee which they have filled out and you have And they were also contacted for a phone interview which they also participated in. So, your reservations are noted and, this is for governor's message, seven nineteen and seven fifty one reservations for Senator McKelvey, and then, the no vote on six ninety seven. Any other comments or concerns? Okay.

And reservations for Senator La Masa on governor's message seven nineteen and seven fifty one. Any other comments or concerns? Okay. A quick disclosure. Governor's message, seven seven six, doctor Sawai, and governor's message, 714 Andrea Ushijima are personal acquaintances that I have known since before I was elected.

They are incredibly talented individuals that I highly respect and I'm really happy that the state benefits from their tenure on these boards, but I just wanted to disclose that for everyone's consideration. If there's no other discussion, then the recommendation is to advise and consent to all of the aforementioned nominees and the chair goes aye.

Thank you. Vice chair also votes aye. Senator La Masaal? Aye. Senator McKelvey?

I accept the ones I've noted. Yes. Okay. Senator Awak?

Aye.

Okay. Your recommendations are adopted.

Thank you very much. We're adjourned. So all the nominees that Good morning and welcome. We're reconvening this 09:30am agenda so that we can take up the last, nominee. Governor's message five fourteen and five fifteen, John Itamura for consideration as chairperson of the public utilities commission for multi two terms.

One to expire June 30 of this year and the succeeding term to expire 06/30/2032. First up, we have Josh Green, office of the governor in support. Thank you very much. Dean Hazama, deputy director, DCCA in support. Or we have the director.

Yeah. Okay. Thanks. You're hesitant there for two seconds. Oh, no.

We have it for the department. So Right. Oh no, now we have the director next. Yeah, in support. You guys tried to double testimony. Okay, okay. Got it. Steve Golden, Hawaiian Telecom in support. K. Jeff Ono in support.

Good morning. Good morning. Thank you, chair, vice chair, and members of this committee. My name is Jeff Ono. I'm a former consumer advocate. My tenure was from January 2011 through August 2016. At that during that period, Johnny Tomorrow was our chief counsel of the division.

And I just wanted to explain, we had a mentor mentee relationship, but it wasn't in the traditional sense. He was as much a mentor to me as I was a mentor to him, and maybe even more so he mentored me, especially during my early years. I wanna point out that John has the leadership abilities to, take control and lead this public utilities commission during this transitional time, when we move toward 2045 and renewable energy, RPS is a 100%.

I also wanna point out that John is a consensus builder, but he is also very decisive. And he has this uncanny ability to get people to do things that they might not otherwise want to do, without ever feeling like he's forced you to do something or that you're doing something you didn't wanna do.

And let me give you an example. He he got me and Dean Nishina, another former consumer advocate, to do the Okinawan lion dance at the at the DCCA employee awards show. And that's for those who don't know what the o Okinawan lion is. It's kinda like the Chinese dragon, except way hair hairier. And that really wasn't meant to be an Okinawan stereotype and I apologize for that.

But, anyway, it was the most claustrophobic experience I've ever had. And with that, I will stand in strong support of the nomination of John E. Tomorrow as chair of the PUC. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Edward Knox in support.

Good morning. Good morning. Chair, vice chair, members, and senators, just wanted to briefly briefly summarize my already brief testimony in support. I just wanted to say that I was very fortunate that Johnny Amor was my supervising attorney when I first started to practice law. He was very patient, teaching me how to practice, teaching me about public utilities regulation law in Hawaii, and I have a lot of confidence that he will bring all those qualities and more to the PC.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Michelangelo in support.

Morning, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. I expressed my strong support for Johnny Tomori. You have my written testimony, but I figured I'd highlight some of the points.

I think when it comes to, overseeing a regulatory body such as the Public Utilities Commission, you need somebody who is very public interest minded, and that is John, and that was my, experience with him when I worked as, my first, term at well, my first, go at the consumer advocates office where I was there as an analyst.

I worked John was the supervising attorney, has been already mentioned. I think it's really important to know he was highly supportive of staff. He was as as, Jeff mentioned, he's a mentor. He had an open door policy. I really learned a tremendous amount from him as an engineer.

You know, sometimes the law doesn't always make sense to us because we're more of an A or B type analysis. So we had a lot of spirited discussions from the technical sense. And I think one unique thing about John that's been alluded to as well is he can navigate any type of situation. And I think that's a testament to his character and his, self effacing humility. He injects the humor at the right time and can keep any conversation balanced.

He has on his competence, he has, command of the law and administrative rules and use it effectively to make public interest balanced decisions about what is, in the interest of customers and the general public. And I learned a tremendous amount from him. And like I said, we didn't always agree. We had spirited discussions and nor should we. But I always came away, learning more and was very fortunate to be able to work together with John during my time at the division of consumer advocacy.

And thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments and strong support.

Thank you very much. Sandy Wong in support online?

Not present on Zoom, chair.

Thank you. Dean Nishina in support online.

Thank you. Dean Nishina in support online.

Dean, can you unmute yourself, please? Thank you. Good morning.

Can you hear me now?

Yes. Go ahead.

Good morning, chair Keohokalole, vice chair of Fukunaga, members of the committee. My name is Dean Nishina. I stand in strong support of the confirmation of John Itomura. I basically stand on my written testimony, but I'd like to offer again, you know, John possesses a lot of tangible and intangible qualities that will make him an excellent, selection for the next Hawaii Public Utilities commissioner and chairperson.

I believe that you folks have a rare opportunity here where John has the experience and knowledge of not only the commission's processes and procedures, but also of all the industries.

So I think it should be an easy decision to determine that John is very qualified to be the next commissioner and chair. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am available if there are any questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Sean Takeda McLaughlin in support online. Good morning. Hello. We have well, I think we have you.

If you have us, please go ahead.

hello. This is Sean McLaughlin. Sorry for the technical glitch. I really appreciate this opportunity. I in addition to my written testimony, I really just wanna note for for John that he has this opportune moment to reclaim some integrity for communications, telecom regulation in Hawaii, which has sorely failed, the consumers and the public interest in recent years.

I know the committee has some purview over this, but the PUC chair has the ability really to steer the ship and correct this failure. And I think as a role model, I would offer Yukio Naito, and what he did with the communications infrastructure docket to really elevate public policy discussion, to inform widely, the community and the industry and public sector about, the issues that were coming up across the landscape.

So, I think it's a really exciting moment for Hawaii, and I'm and I'm thrilled to be able to support, John's nomination. After that, I just like to stand on the written testimony of, Randy Awase and Carl Kaliposo. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I believe that is all of the testimony we have by individuals who indicated they would be present and would like to submit testimony at the table. Is there anyone else who would like to do that? Please. Thank you.

We we also have your written testimony in support. Is there anyone else who would like to

I'm gonna ask you to sit, and that's just so that we got you in the feed online.

So chair, vice chair, Tony Baldemaro. I submitted testimony, like I said, on behalf of 1260. But I also had the opportunity to work with John when he was at the campaign spending commission as our general counsel and as well as a volunteer campaign spending commissioner. A very competent individual, very well versed on the administrative processes that the PUC will have to go through, and I will stand on that. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Okay. Anyone else online? Okay.

Considering the gravity of the nomination, I'll just go through the written testimony. We have Keith Hayashi, superintendent of education in support. Tony Nodine, founder of North Kona Noise Action with comments. Isaac Moriwaki for Earthjustice in support. Nate Nelson, Hawaii Gas in support.

And the following individuals who all submitted testimony in support, Jody Yamamoto, Karen Takahashi, Jisook Kim, Craig Nakanishi, Hermina Morita, Lisa Hirooka, Randy Iwasi, Andrew Okabe, Renee Kamita, Cobra Matsumoto, Jason Horiuchi, Naomi Kuwaye, excuse me, Carrie Tanaka, James Griffin, Jason Umemoto, Catherine Abakuni Colone, Colin Yost, Cheryl Kikuta, Anand Sampani, Nancy Cassandro, Tomoko Valdez, Lisa Enga Breton, Ashley Norman, Russell Hena, Carlito Calaboso, Sandra Larson, Marlene Hirooka, Blake Oshiro, Delman Won, Dean Yamamoto, Eric Nita, Donna Nakamura, and Jody Chang. Okay. Last call for testifiers.

If not, we'll have the nominee come up and, make a statement. Good morning.

Good morning, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. If I were smart, I would stand on every else everyone else's testimony.

When have you ever seen the justice and AES agree on anything like you?

But, I'll go ahead and provide an opening statement. And I thank you for allowing me this opportunity. It's an honor and privilege to be nominated to serve as chair of the Public Utilities Commission. As you're well aware, chairperson isn't simply a title. It it's really a responsibility.

The chair's responsibility to his fellow commissioners. In this case, mister Colin A. Yost and miss Naomi Kuwaye. I have a responsibility to my staff. I have a responsibility to the utilities as well. But most importantly, our responsibility to be fair and impartial for the benefit of utility repairs.

The consumer I'm sorry. The, regulatory role of the PUC is unique when compared to other regulatory agencies. While the PUC must balance the needs of the consumer to receive safe, reliable, and affordable service against the financial viability of the utilities to provide the same when determining appropriate rates, The PUC is also in a unique position to develop and promote transitional and innovative policies in the area of energy, water transportation, and provision of water, wastewater related services.

So what is my vision for the next six years and how would I be effective? I'm sure that's running through your heads.

My my vision foremost is to be proactive. I'll prioritize state energy goals on the path to 100% clean energy in 2045. In addition to processing all utility PUC dockets in a timely manner with an emphasis on affordability. Also important is adherence to the commission's 2025 inclinations and the governor's executive order 25-01. To do this, I'll need to be proactive with the following.

I need to be proactive with energy policy development. I need to be proactive with promoting transitions to new technologies and cleaner energy while preserving reliability and affordability. I need to be proactive with collaborating with stakeholders, with the consumer advocate, with the current administration, and most importantly, with this legislature. This vision is especially important with the governor seeking 100% clean energy for the islands of Kauai, Maui, and Hawaii ten years prior to the 2045 goals.

Therefore, in order to be effective, I must immediately work collaboratively with my commissioners, my two, fellow commissioners.

I need to value, acknowledge and manage the voluminous work done by a PUC staff consisting of excellent lawyers, research analysts, engineers, auditors, compliance analysts, and of course, our administrative officers. I need to be effective with promoting transparency to educate consumers and legislatures legislators related to determine the balance of affordable utility rates with reliable service and long term sustainability goals. And, of course, I need to be effective with pursuing an aggressive energy resource planning timeline.

So today, I humbly request that you support my nomination for the following reasons. I have been a public servant for over 25 years, as you heard, including counsel to the Land Use Commission, Campaign Spending Commission, and the Division of Consumer Advocacy.

I have the experience of working in the legislative, arena with WAM and judiciary. I've had the opportunity to observe leadership by no less than five prior PUC chairs. I worked alongside for the last four months, I worked alongside two very competent and knowledgeable commissioners who bring great knowledge from their prior fields to the table. And most importantly, at the commission, there is an elite and highly educated staff equipped to analyze the very complex niche of utility regulation.

Therefore, I wanna sincerely thank those who have testified in support of my nomination and respectfully ask for your support to enable me to succeed in achieving affordability and reliability for Hawaii's utility customers and meeting the state energy milestones.

Thank you. Mahalo, and I'll be available for your questions.

Thank you very much. Members, who wants to go first? Senator Thank you.

Senator. Thank you.

Thank you.

Just so that everyone knows, by right any Senator can attend any proceeding in the Senate. I personally ask people to come for this one. So we'll allow members at the table to to come and ask their questions now. Senator San Buenaventura.

So thank you chair And and thank you for allowing me to go first because I do have another appointment with a potential circuit court judge. So, I represent the Big Island. And the PUC has caused some decisions. I would like to know what your opinions are, if you if you are knowledgeable about some of these decisions, regarding specifically the, bioenergy plant outside of Hilo, Uhonua. K?

Sometime in 2020, the PUC, I guess, in knowing about the 2045, right, approved a very expensive power purchasing agreement, which would have cost the consumers quite a bit of money. And because of that approval, a lot of investors put a ton of money in Hovhanu'a. I mean, millions of dollars, assuming that that power purchase agreement, which was approved by the PUC, would come to fruition. And they went into contract. So there were ranchers who were cutting down trees specifically for this plant.

2022 came. They backed off. And basically, they denied the super expensive power purchasing agreement. I want to know, now there's like this billion dollar lawsuit. Investors lost a lot of money.

Investors that could have put that money somewhere else. Right? Where we could have had this energy I mean, who are pro satisfying the 2045. But what are your opinions regarding this kind of back and forth by the PUC and regarding also whether or not there is gonna be a balancing regarding the cost to the consumer in reaching these, these the 2045 goals. What is your position regarding that?

Thank you for your question, Senator. First of all, I can't speak to the specifics. It was during a time that I was not active with the consumer with the PUC. I am familiar with the circumstances of.

I also understand that there were matters related to interpretations of issues regarding greenhouse gas. However, looking forward and in answer to your question is that in order to be very aggressive in our movement towards renewable energy, we'll be looking at every element. And and given that it's unfortunate that that happened, but at least that provides a background for what needs to be looked into and and vetted so that we don't run into the same issue twice.

And, of course, with the big Island, they're actually moving pretty well in furtherance of a clean energy goal. The we always monitor the adequacy of supply there.

And given that and many other elements, we will not be making the same mistake twice. So there's a commitment to decisions that will be founded on the facts before us in any given case. And again, in that situation, there were arguably items that were unforeseen. That's now not the case, at least with those specific facts.

The power purchase agreement though remained the same. It was super high and super expensive. I mean, it would have tripled the the energy bill. I mean, the for the Hawaii island consumers. And so I could see why the investors jumped on it.

But I guess that's all we can get from you right now. It's a commitment that in balancing the need to meet the 2045 goal, you're not gonna throw throw the consumer under the bus. Correct. Okay. And I guess the the second question is, that's coming up to all of us really here is, there there is a bill that's out there regarding water carriers.

What is your position regarding the legislature, if there is one, trying to set, Inter Island shipping costs instead of going through the PUC?

Okay.

I believe you may be referring to an automatic cost adjustment for the Young Brothers.

Yes. What's your opinion regarding that? If there is one.

There is always opinions regarding Young Brothers. Right. Given given, my history with, my time as the consumer advocate, you know, we've had challenges, looking through, cost elements with Young Brothers. And given the depth that we've had to look through their books and look through their operations, we understand both sides that they have challenges. Of course, our our goal at that time is again affordability for the repairs.

And so we were always pushing them to change operations or amend operations to that effect, with respect to the current bill. That's why you notice that the Public Utilities Commission is very cautious about automatic cost, reward to that utility. Because in the past, we've witnessed where, even when they have had the opportunity for automatic cost adjustments, they still came in for rate increases. And that's what we wanna avoid going forward.

And this is an area that, you know, I will be looking to the legislature for assistance and collaboration because there there comes a time that they may legitimately have costs that they aren't having difficulty controlling. But where does the PUC draw the line for the cost that the consumers are gonna bear? And at that time, and I think we've passed that time really and crossed that line.

So I wanna work with the legislature and see what other alternatives are there to help, whether it's a subsidy or whatnot in order to help the rate payers. Because it's very important that the service they provide to the state of Hawaii, notably the smaller islands, It's very necessary.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you. Members?

Who's next? You ready? Just a minute here. Just a minute.

Senator Lee.

Yeah. Thanks. First of all, congratulations on your nomination. There are a couple things I wanted to touch on that PUC's been involved with over a number of years now that have been brought up in discussions here and yet still remain on the PUC's upcoming timeline and agenda. Some years ago, PUC ordered bring your own device program, which is basically a virtual power plant program that can let people produce their own power and contribute to the broader grid.

It's something that has been done in utilities coast to coast, Green Mountain Power on the East Coast all the way to PG&E is doing it on the West Coast. That program, as I understand, is still not up and running. And correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Separately there's been, there's been a pretty big focus on, HECO's EV program, which, the PUC had, to opine on but they took so long I think that ultimately HECO just gave up is my understanding and pulled the plug.

Separately in the legislature after, oh I don't know, almost probably two decades, Over the last two decades, we've been pushing for community renewables and solar and those kinds of projects that can open up behind the meter opportunities to reduce people's own power costs even though they might live in a condo or you know somewhere where they don't actually have the ability to do that.

These are quite prevalent around the country right now. Pretty much every state, every utility has some form of this going. Separately, there's a number of other things like time of use rates, which I think were nearly every state maybe except us now has in place or is continuing to evolve.

All of these programs when done and implemented properly as has been demonstrated time and time again all around the country can save considerable money for ratepayers and reduce that cost of electricity at a time when obviously it's going up and up and up, Iran and a number of other things. Yet these programs have I think failed to materialize in meaningful ways or been dropped by the PUC like time of use rates rather than continue to be figured out and implemented.

That means the way that I think we look at it and hear from our constituents and regular families, they're paying through the teeth and they've lost these opportunities that other families in other places are getting to reduce those costs. My question is amongst all of these programs and and others that are before the PUC, what can you do to really pick up the pieces and get us back on track? Because ultimately, every additional day without these tools available to rate payers means they're paying more.

Okay. Thank you for your question. This may not be accurate, but if I would sum up your concerns in one word, I think it's delay. And so, of course, delay involves a lot of components. As I look back on a number of cases, even currently open cases, it's often the commission, appeasing parties requests for extensions of time or more vetting and whatnot.

And that's where moving forward along the lines of being proactive and moving toward our goals, we need, and I will be promoting, that there are strict timelines and strict goals that we if it won't be as permissible to say, okay. We keep giving people more time. A lot of the work that we do while we're making our own decisions and our own analysis are based upon the input from stakeholders.

And often in the past, even in the case of the consumer advocate, we've asked for time to, you know, do further vetting, further analysis. But, again, we're now in a crunch that that may not be possible, and we need to move forward.

We need, we're in that position, as I mentioned earlier, to guide policy as well as regulate, and that that's exactly where we would be. But for one example, you mentioned BYOD plus, at least that was the last iteration that I recall hearing. We're moving aggressively forward, and we'll be soon filing an an order to open a virtual power plant docket that will essentially take that the place of that because it allows more flexibility and hopefully more buy in.

But that's that's an example of we're not gonna simply be reactive and wait for the docket to evolve. We need to start pushing these out just as you mentioned.

Thank you. Thank you, chair.

Members?

Question?

Up to you. Okay.

Can you comment on so the this discussion of delay has been a significant item of concern in this committee since I took over the chair. We've heard maybe more than a dozen pieces of legislation over the years that have proposed to set timelines or shot clocks on the PUC in the hopes of requiring some certainty and decision making. I mean, aside from your comment there, how how else do you plan to address that complaint?

Can you comment on so the the this discussion of delay has been a significant item of concern in this committee since I took over the chair. We've heard maybe more than a dozen pieces of legislation over the years that have proposed to set timelines or shot clocks on the PUC in the hopes of requiring some certainty and decision making. I mean, aside from your comment there, how how else do you plan to address that complaint?

It's a complaint in in almost every context that the PUC is responsible for.

No. And I I totally understand. Even being being away for a span, that was often our concern at the consumer advocate. There was a time that there was significant delay, and and we didn't receive adequate reasons why that was. Moving forward, I think one way to address that significantly, and I can't speak for what's happened in the last, you know, more recently, is very close and collaborative efforts with between the PUC and the legislature because it works both ways.

It could be where the legislature is wanting to move forward and wants to be prescriptive. By being prescriptive, it may actually cause more delay in upper in the operational sense. But that happens when there's not adequate communication between us. And that's what I wanna resolve and hope to be very aggressive with.

Okay. Thank you. Now what what are your you know? So you've been you've been seated for was it four months? K.

What what are your top three goals for the your your tenure if if confirmed?

Top three goals. One is to address exactly what you're saying, is to reduce delay. And, so the word proactive is very general, possibly vague, but in in my view, it's not. It's to be, within even the four months, I think my staff can can say that they've seen areas where I'm moving them forward on what whether it's a docket or discussion. It's always we need to we need to be decisive.

We need to move forward. So addressing delay is one goal. Creating creating an environment that is a very credible and positive atmosphere at the commission is also very important for me. And what I felt was, not adequately addressed from, what I've been hearing. When I started, it's only been four months, but it feels like it's been a long time.

My immediate task was to allow everyone and anyone to have confidential communications with me so that I could hear their personal feelings about what needs to be done or changed at the commission. Of course, with no commitment on my part is to really do an honest assessment, a real time assessment of what's going on. And given that discussion, I've made many changes that I hope will move us in the right direction. Not I hope, I know will move us in the right direction.

Lastly, I know that the commission has responded to the legislature by providing a timeline of how we'll reach or attempt to reach the 2045 goal of 100%.

But I've already spoken with staff that I need a broader picture. I need a map. And so, you know, forgive me for making reference to Lord of the Rings, but it's, you know, the commission is in the unfortunate position of being Frodo. And and we're given the ring, which is fossil fuels or anything to the light. We need to take that ring to 2045 and throw it in the fire.

But how do we do that? It's one thing to see a timeline of dockets, and and the exact things that you mentioned, delays or whatnot, impacts those dockets. But if I can see a map that outlines the journey and how we go, that's that's what I wanna see, where the mountains are, where the valleys are. Can we pick the low hanging fruit and get through them really quick, whether that's forms of DER or whatnot.

IGP as the legislature keeps wanting to say, hey, commission, where's your planning?

Where's your your overall comprehensive planning? Well, we're doing that through IGP buyer. Obviously, it's not clear enough to the legislature. So I I understand and I accept the legislature's call to do that, but that may be the mountain that we climb and being that it's a mountain, well, we probably need to start earlier to get to the other side And, you know, going all the way down to who we need help from, right, is gonna be, what is it? The fellowship of the ring.

I need everyone's help. I need the stakeholder's help, the consumer advocates help. And, again, most importantly, I need help not only from the administration, but from legislators. That's will help me in the short time that I have, but we will hit twenty thirty during my my role as chair. And there are goals in 2030 that we need to meet, and I hope to surpass them.

Thank you. Follow-up question.

Given your national CEO's

is big oil the Nazgul. No. No. I can't share for a long but, no, I appreciate you being here. I mean, you've heard the frustrations, right, on but I I like what you're saying about we need a map.

We need a map. We all we get is the complaint end of it. Whether it's the rate payers are being you know, or just absolutely because as I say, energy bills don't live in a vacuum. You gotta pay gas bills and everything. So it's all is cumulative.

Right? It all comes down on one thing. So I I you know, but one of the things we've been pushing has been to the chair's point has been weeding, especially for state facilities. So we can do our own generation and we are excess energy amongst ourselves. I think that's one of the areas why he's seen bills.

And, you know, I I credit my predecessor for the good former chairman from Kauai for initiating legislative dockets, you know, PUC dockets through legislation. But I think we keep doing this because to your point, we don't have a road map either On how all of this fit. If if progress is being made, how does this trickle down to our schools being able to wheel excess energy to other state facilities?

So our electrical bill, which hasn't been discussed, which is gonna skyrocket too, the state's bill is gonna go up dramatically. So I just wanna appreciate you putting that out there because we need a map as well.

Understood.

I'm I'm not sure the map in my head was akin to taking the ring to Mordor.

I think it's a much more effective map.

Illustrative. So Yes. We'll go with Senator Fevella and then a follow-up from Senator.

Yes. Just just just a second. I'm sure like that. I talked to another committee. I don't know if this has been asked.

My my concern about, I guess, moving forward with our clean energy and all these things that we're always talking about new situation. Yeah? And I always hear Senator Dela Cruz talking about firm energy. Yeah? We don't have enough projects or stuff going around firm energy.

And I'm still hearing that, you know, on my side of the island, which is a US side, and we're still considering Williams. Yeah. And, you know, previous speakers before or since I've been here said that it wasn't gonna be looking into that technology because it's not really clean energy. How they make the windmills, fabrication, it's not clean energy. Still have to use oil to make the windmills.

You need oil to lubricate the windmills. And, again, windmills was never supposed to be in a community like Kahuku, like, yeah. It was never supposed to be met for around us. So at the time when they did the study, and I'm pretty sure you wasn't there, the study had shown there was NA, not applicable when it came to human beings. And I looked into that, and you guys know why?

So I just wanna bring this up so it's on the record because it was never meant to be by human beings. Birds, landscape, insects, everything that you could think of, nothing talked about being on farmland and being by people. So the windmills to this day in Kaluku, everything around that windmill, every single part of that dirt, whatever, it will never grow. It'll die. It's dead.

So, again, going forward, my side of the community, I know I talk about Kaluku. My side of the community, they wanted to do Camp Palihua, Camp Tiburon, whatever they like to call them now. A 100% against it. What I like to see is I like to see what the POC can move forward in coming up with ideas of again. And you guys heard me talk about this interview.

Not all my colleagues believe it, but we are behind time having a a true waste to energy plant here, whether it's on Oahu or the neighbor islands, like, in especially in Hilo, where it's pretty much needed because they travel with the with their O'Palm Two two to three hours just to get over to Mauna, and then another two, three hours just to get to the that field. All of that can be burned.

And then I heard the whole thing over and again in that field, but I hear it was, oh, we don't have enough rubbish to burn now at each power. That's not a true waste to energy plant because it's dirty. True waste to energy plant is a zero to no c o two emissions.

That one doesn't have that. They don't burn everything. And I brought this up again in previous meetings previously, in the last two, three years. Why are we not looking? Like, we always look at every place else all over the world.

Why are we not looking at other countries? Like, Indonesia. You know, they have so much different kind of power plants that can be retrofit for our islands. Right? At one time, we was looking at in Kamala Industrial because everything is there, but then it never never never went over.

So the Senator of Wakai, yeah, Senator Wakai had passed a bill so that it would go to the neighbor island smaller. Then my neighbor island colleague, especially in Maui, didn't really care for it. But Hilo was more responsive. But, again, even when we introduce this and, again, I'm not blaming you individually. But when we bring this up, it's never entertained on the real new technology when we're talking about this.

We always talk about windmills, solo farm, you know, PV, all of these kinds of stuff that takes away from actual landscape and farming land. So that's something that I guess I I mean, not not challenging you, but just for you to think in mind keep in mind how we're gonna have clean, firm energy moving forward to the next over and all all these energy bills. Because right now, we're paying high cost of energy bills going forward.

How I mean, I guess, how would you be able to bring that to the table with not having especially top priorities, like, with windmill and PV on the side of Baka Kilo, Wanakahele area mounted. Sorry.

It's so long. But yeah.

No. That's a lot. But well taken. You know, I think one challenge I know one challenge is definitely with evolving technology. You have evolving challenges.

So even with all the support for even, say, solar, like you said, there is a life cycle cost to solar. You don't get that stuff there without a gas fuel, you know, fossil fuel vehicle. You don't build it. You don't you don't develop or prepare the land for it without fossil fuel. So there there's there's a life cycle cost to everything.

Then, you know, I think I've I've heard Senator McKelvey mentioned it in in the past that what about the end of that cycle, or even in Maui where you had fires destroy a lot of solar? And what is the impact on the land there? And how long will that impact last? Those are all things that make the discussion and the analysis very difficult. But the flip side of that is how quick can we weigh that?

How how quick can we provide analysis as to how it impacts reliability and, of course, affordability? And if we can protect against it, then, of course, we need to move fast and and true because we we face unique challenges being island grid. Land is scarce. Land is precious. As you said, if you lose agricultural lands, it could be a very, very long, if not permanent damage.

So but that shouldn't stop us from weighing reliability, affordability, and our energy goals.

The only reason why I bring this up. And, again, it's it's probably wasn't you, but but we had the previous, while back, energy chair. And they knew that we wasn't gonna be able to handle the grid by shutting down the coal plant.

There was any room not again, not maybe not you, but any wiggle room that the PUC could have made, I guess, a report saying that, you know, if we do this and the energy I mean, I know it's probably made not in your area, but, again, we didn't have no oversight.

Nobody ever we got caught with a black eye and a punch in the face when they're in close on knowing that we wasn't even ready to move forward with with the with the closure of the plant.

And and then we wasn't in in session at the time that energy share or maybe even a POC could have made a recommendation to the senators or or the legislation to say, you know what? We cannot close this plant because, you know, people gonna suffer if we close them this right away or have a better process.

So I don't know if you guys have that kind of input or oversight, but I just wanted to know if you guys did, how how we would have done things differently.

If we if we didn't have that oversight, which I would arguably disagree with, and, you know, I I intend to include it as much as authority legal authority allows us to. And, you know, you keep saying not you, not you, but I know in no less than a month or two, it's gonna be all me. So, you know, I I take those comments to be directed directly at me, and I will be addressing those.

Right. Well, it's not like you have fault for other people's lack of vision. Yeah? You know what I mean? So thank you for that response.

Thank you, chair.

Chair, if I can ask a follow-up. I mean, it it seems like I'm wondering if we can take your response that the priority is on speed, but factoring in reliability and affordability. I mean, do you consider those key principles to the the way you're going to proceed as chair of the PUC?

These energy questions are constantly changing and they're always top of mind controversial issues in the legislature because we're the ones that have to hear from the public when the prices go up and the prices are going up right now. You know, I've heard controversies during my twelve years in office over wind, over over solar, geothermal, and and oil.

People don't even realize how much of our oil in Hawaii comes from Libya. You know, there's pushback on on wind. There's a large proposal right now for LNG mind we we have a brand new set of questions because of the closure of the Strait Of Hormuz. So we've continually struggled at the legislature to deal with the rush of anger and confusion and and,

you know, animosity when we talk about siting energy projects. And a lot of it in my opinion comes from the fact that communities are not brought along to these larger questions about what we're doing with energy. So, you know, you got dockets and a fair process that you're trying to conduct. Should we look to these these speed, reliability, affordability as as, you know, the principles you're gonna stick by when we have these hard conversations?

Easy answer is yes. The difficult answer is that even as I say yes, I believe at this table there's an acknowledgment that the devil's always in the details. But along the way, there may have been decisions made whether to go analysis paralysis or move forward. Transparency is a big thing. Educating the public, educating the legislatures.

Those are all things maybe that weren't done effectively in the past, and that needs to be done going forward. Because the answers I can't sit here and say the answers will be the correct answers, especially with how fast technology is evolving. What's correct today, even the solar panel example, what's correct today may not be correct tomorrow. We we rely on solar. Let's just say, for example, let's rely a 100% on solar to reach our goals.

Well, these panels have anywhere from fifteen to thirty to forty year lifespans, but this take twenty years. Well, grandpa put it on the roof and grandpa put 20 panels on the roof. Son or daughter or worse grandchildren will decide we can't afford to replace them. What does that do to our our grid or our reliance on clean energy? The hope is that new energies are coming along.

But what if that new energy alternative is expensive? And still that person that's replacing removing the panels, will they replace it with some other form of stored energy for and however it's acquired? But then we can't spend these years just saying what if, what if, what if, and that's not gonna work either. So that's the fine line between speed, aggressive, proactiveness. Okay.

I saw I saw twitching at the table. Does anyone have a follow-up?

On the table. Yeah.

We'll go vice chair and then and then Senator. I

I guess as a quick follow-up on that, you know, you talked about, speed, reliability, and affordability. Then part of what seemed to have become problematic in recent times has been sort of staff changes, exodus of, you know, experienced and talented people.

And in your questions, you know, your responses to the committee's questions, part of what you talked about was developing and maintaining the staff that has a reputation for unequal policy, legal, and subject matter expertise, as well as promoting the PUC to the public as a leader, you know, in developing and pursuing clean energy goals. How do you see that being possible or, you know, doable against the backdrop of all of these other competing issues and challenges?

So one positive is that with Hawaii being able to be on the edge of it, you know, envelope and being island grid, I don't wanna see a test bed, but, you know, time's a test bed. We're able to attract a lot of talent, and maybe maybe that hasn't been done effectively in terms of attracting bright minds.

That also goes with saying that if they're they come to say specifically, the PUC and they're trained and they become excited about these issues, no doubt there's a good chance we lose them. And that's that's been one of the reasons. Another reason is, of course, how any place is managed, whether it's a mom and pops or a big corporation, how was it managed?

And that's why it was so important for me to speak with each employee and find out what were the reasons for recent departures. Legislatures to do additional studies, additional docket. We can't afford to lose bodies. You know, as it is, what we opened over 400 cases, four eighty cases last year. We've issued over 700 decisions and orders.

And that is just the meat and potatoes. That's not going into all the other things. So but the the work and and the opportunity to participate in this enormous change and pivot in how Hawaii deals with energy is very attractive, and we just need to harness that and promote that and be able to arguably that contribution that those people will have to Hawaii's future is very attractive, and we need to make sure we harness that.

Senator Lee.

Thanks. Just following up, I think, on Senator Fevella and some of the other comments that were made. You know, when the when delays continue on projects, we get all kinds of problems, obviously. Right? Utility was supposed to I think that PUC tried to push the utility to get projects done, the solar projects and storage projects and other things, because of the coal plant shutting down.

That didn't happen for I don't know. You probably know better than us why. But what that's meant is, you know, we're facing capacity issues on the island. Right? At peak, there's rolling blackouts, things like that that seem to happen almost monthly now.

I mean, other places like California were experiencing that exact same thing four or five years ago intentionally shifted in their regulatory approach and said, no, we need to end this. And rapidly fast tracked a whole bunch of battery storage projects for long duration storage, you know, hundred hour, four day plus. And in the last handful of years, they've had zero capacity issues now. Zero compared to us. How do we get the PUC to push the utilities to not delay those things, number one.

And on the second hand, a lot of these kinds of new approaches that have now being done kind of everywhere simply haven't been part of the discussion here. And in utility driven planning like the IGP and others, those often don't materialize because they're not part of the utilities plans even if they're for whatever reason financial otherwise.

But how do we through the PUC ensure that we're looking at the best most affordable options that are gonna actually solve our problems even if the utilities or other players aren't finding it in their own financial interest to do so?

So I'm still catching up with details of the performance based rate making process, and that's something that could be an avenue that we're, you know, whether it's PIMS and penalties and what and what it what it specifically relates to. That could be one area. Another is you speak of battery storage, you know. Again, is are there opportunities to work with the legislature? We've we've provided incentives, you know, and for solar.

Well, maybe we need to shift and start focusing on storage. Maybe we just need to be more aggressive.

Thanks, Sharon. I have just one follow-up on that shifting gears because I know time is tight. And you talked a lot about the renewable energy goals and RPS and all those things, which is great. That's the law. When we passed that law, that was as much about renewable energy as it was about energy security and getting off of imports.

And at a time right now when our reliance on continued oil and and other things is driving prices up and you're seeing oil and natural gas just blow up in cost, obviously getting off of those imports has to be a huge part of that priority.

But in your mind, as we go down the road to 2045, if we're in 2045 still reliant, let's say it's all renewable, maybe it's biofuels or hydrogen or whatever that we're importing, but we're still spending billions of dollars to import those fuels, have we thrown the ring in the fire? Have we succeeded?

Possibly not. And, you know, then there's, all those related issues. Is it is it something that needs to be done about the Jones Act? You know, things like that. And who know a myriad of other issues as technology changes.

That's not an answer I would have for you right now except with a commitment to work toward an answer. But like you said, if there's any potential positive in delays, as you mentioned, we should be able to look across, you know, across the waters whether it's domestic, I mean, Continental US or foreign foreign countries.

Let me let me ask you just a little more acutely. In your mind is the priority and preference to get off of imported anything and focus on local resiliency and energy security given the choice? Of course. Yes. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you, chair. Members.

So the so the preference would be to develop energy locally over importing it from outside.

I mean, it goes towards so many different fields. I mean, look at food. That that's that's a goal. Why not energy? Whether how feasible that is and, you know, how reasonable that is, that that's a question.

But we

Well, that is the conflict in my mind between reliability and affordability. Yes. Reliability means we control it ourselves because we produce it here in Hawaii. Yes. Affordability means the cheapest means of production.

Reliability also

You know, we we've lost over my lifetime the ability to raise our own chickens, you know, for consumption. Recently, we've lost our ability to raise our own eggs for consumption, you know, in addition to beef, milk, you know, bakeries. And so we have these goals of trying to get off fossil fuels, but also this competing, I I believe, need to be able to control our own destiny given the chaotic nature of the world.

And so the more energy we develop here, I think the more we're capable of doing that. But there is a lot of conflict in those two priorities.

Well, reliability

as I was using it lends itself to reliable available power and energy. I think what you're both mentioning is resilience and but, yes, that's important.

And risk. And risk. Yes. Volatility in the fuels that we choose to rely upon Yes. And those unforeseen costs.

Like Iran.

Yes. Or or the fact that the federal administration currently has unwound And I think I've heard from the members of the congressional delegation effectively banned renewable energy development on federal lands or where there's a Federal Government tie. So when we have a federal administration saying no renewables and we have a world market saying if you pay for fossils, you're gonna pay a lot because it's an unstable period, then we are caught between we're caught in between a rock and a hard place. Right?

And and the hope is that there's always opportunity for change. And if there is a different administration and a different focus that impacts the analysis.

Well, but you're gonna be asked to pull the trigger on things Right. That are brought before you, and we're gonna have to make some commitments here that we might potentially benefit from or or come to regret. Right? In in politics, there's a saying, sometimes the wrong decision made quickly enough becomes the right decision. And so how are you gonna weigh all three?

That's exactly what it is. It's weighing and balancing. Sometimes it's a necessary evil.

Okay. We're we're running out of time. So I'm gonna I'm gonna just ask these questions because they've been asked, of me many times, by members of the public, but but also by members of this body. You know, you were appointed by the governor. The governor has publicly come out in favor of, LNG.

His energy office has weighed in very publicly on proceedings in which you were in charge and and needed to make decisions. Can you comment for the public and the body's edification on how you plan to navigate potential questions about, you know, your ability to make independent decisions given the fact that you were appointed by the governor and the governor has been very open and and clear about his preference for energy development in the future?

I think it's very easy, and I think it's probably been said by many who preceded me that our role as chair of the public jitters commission is to be to oversee a quasi judicial body. We're independent, unbiased, the the governor has as much told me that he he abides by that, and I trust that he will. But my role is to follow the regulatory statutes, regents that guide me and there can be no sway from that.

But that doesn't mean that whether it's the the administration or the legislature providing input and comment and opinion, Our consideration of that does not mean that it is some overriding control or bias. And likewise, I think you've seen, I can't speak to open dockets, but you've seen that while the governor has an inclination towards LNG, he's also, opined on on our recent decision in order.

So it shows that we need to react almost as any court would with owning the facts that are in front of us. And, of course, on policy matters, we need to take in as much information as possible. But if the question is whether I'm beholden to the the administration because of the nomination, no.

Okay. Well, thank you for acknowledging that and acknowledging that you have had discussions with the governor about that. HECO has not participated in this hearing, but there are obviously an elephant in the room. Can you characterize the nature of your discussions with HECO if you've had them during this process?

I would I would only say it's it's very similar to my role with the consumer advocate that we sit at the table and we go over issues and we often agree to disagree. And, the times that we agree, it's always gonna be for the benefit of the ratepayer. And, of course, I in the same vein, when we agree to disagree, it's for the benefit of the ratepayer. Okay. But the commission does have a responsibility to to keep in mind the viability of a utility.

Okay. Members, any last questions? Okay. Seeing none, we'll take a brief recess. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Reconvening on this 09:30am agenda to consider our last nominee, John E. Tomura. Governor's message, 05:14 and 05:15.

To serve as chairperson of the Public Utilities Commission. After reviewing the testimony and the submittals, by the nominee, The recommendation is going to be to advise and consent to mister Itamura's nomination. I've personally met with him and found him to be, qualified, competent, and I was especially appreciative of his command of the role and the nature of the responsibility and and duties that he's taking on. I I actually really appreciated the taking the ring to Mordor.

How many issues?

Illustration because when I thought about it, that does seem to be the nature of the challenge ahead of us collectively. And we do need to all work together to navigate the, you know, peaks and valleys and trolls and goblins, to get there. It's a hard job and, it's a very public job.

And I do appreciate your willingness to step forward and serve in that capacity under a lot of pressure and scrutiny, and stand here and and openly have a conversation with us about the role and how we're gonna all work together going forward. So again, the recommendation is to advise and consent members comments or questions.

Senator McKelvey.

I support your recommendations. Strong support for the nominee. I was so excited that he met with me as a member of the committee. We had great discussions about many of these things. He's willing to basically tell us the hard truth and the facts and not let them be colored.

But mostly his information on how these water dockets are working and really the mechanics of what's going on gave me real clarity on how to approach these things going forward. So because of all of these reasons and the fact that Earthjustice and AES support them, which says a lot, I totally am in strong support of this recommendation. Thank you for holding this hearing and for your recommendation.

Thank you. Any other comments, concerns? If not, advising consent to the nomination, chair votes aye.

Thank you. Vice chair also votes aye. Senator LaMazal? Aye. Senator McKelvey?

Yes. Senator Awa? Aye. Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Congratulations. We're adjourned.