HB1187 amends Hawaii’s procurement law to create a new restriction on state purchases of lei. The bill directs state departments and administratively attached agencies to phase down the share of lei they may buy that contain plant material grown and harvested outside Hawaii, starting with a cap of 90 percent from 2030 through 2044, then 50 percent from 2045 through 2054, 25 percent from 2055 through 2064, and a complete prohibition beginning January 1, 2065.
The measure applies to all state agency lei purchases, including small purchases under the state procurement code. In practical terms, it is designed to shift state demand toward lei made with locally grown and harvested plant material and away from imported floral materials over a long transition period.
Impact
The bill adds a new section to chapter 103D, Hawaii Revised Statutes, the state procurement code, and imposes a procurement preference/restriction specific to lei purchased by state departments and administratively attached agencies. It does not regulate private purchases or general commercial sales, but it will affect state procurement practices, vendor sourcing, and potentially the supply chain for lei used in official state functions and ceremonies. The phased timeline gives agencies and suppliers decades to adjust before the eventual ban on lei containing out-of-state plant material.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests broad support for the bill in the Senate. It passed the Senate Government Operations Committee unanimously and later passed the Senate Ways and Means Committee unanimously as well, though with amendments. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded debate to indicate significant opposition in the materials supplied. Overall, the bill appears to have been received favorably as a local-procurement and cultural-support measure.
Contention
The main policy issue is the long-term restriction on purchasing lei with non-Hawaii-grown plant material, which could raise concerns about cost, availability, and procurement flexibility for state agencies and vendors. Supporters are likely to view the bill as promoting local agriculture, supporting Hawaii growers, and reinforcing cultural authenticity in state purchases. Any opposition would likely focus on whether a future ban is too rigid or whether the state can reliably source sufficient locally grown plant material to meet demand, especially for large or specialized orders.