SB261 would increase the daily compensation paid to jurors and prospective jurors for actual attendance at court under section 612-8, Hawaii Revised Statutes. The bill replaces the current $30 per day amount with a blank amount to be set in the measure, while keeping travel reimbursement in place and specifying that jurors receive the higher of 33 cents per mile or the cost of an adult bus fare to and from court. It also preserves the rule allowing mileage or bus fare for a person who appears as summoned but is later excused or exempted at that person’s request.
The bill also includes an appropriation from general revenues for fiscal years 2025-2026 and 2026-2027 to fund the increased jury compensation, with the judiciary designated as the spending agency. The measure is part of the Judiciary Package and is described as increasing compensation for jurors and prospective jurors. The effective date is set far in the future, April 23, 2057, which is unusual and suggests the bill text may be a draft or placeholder version rather than an immediately operative enactment.
Impact
If enacted, SB261 would amend Hawaii’s jury-duty compensation statute by increasing the per-day payment for jurors and prospective jurors and by continuing travel reimbursement rules tied to mileage or bus fare. It would also require a state general-fund appropriation to the judiciary for implementation in two fiscal years, affecting state budgeting and court administration rather than substantive jury eligibility or service requirements.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was received favorably in committee, passing the Senate Judiciary Committee 5-0 with amendments. No committee transcript is available, but the unanimous vote indicates broad support for the concept of increasing juror compensation and funding it through an appropriation. The bill’s placement in the Judiciary Package also suggests it was treated as a routine court-administration measure rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
The main practical issue in the bill is the cost of raising juror pay, since the measure requires a general-fund appropriation and shifts the financial burden to the state judiciary. Another point of ambiguity is the blank dollar amount in the text, which indicates the final compensation level was not specified in the version provided. Aside from funding and the exact payment amount, the bill does not appear to raise major policy disputes, and the committee vote suggests little opposition at that stage.