Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii Senate Bill SB1025

Introduced
1/17/25  
Refer
1/23/25  

Caption

RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION.

Summary

SB1025 would amend Hawaii law to require that service animals be allowed on all mass transit vehicles at all times and to permit non-service pet animals on mass transit under specified conditions. The bill distinguishes between peak and off-peak travel: during peak hours, pets would need to be in enclosed carriers that fit on a rider’s lap or under a seat, while during off-peak hours larger dogs could ride if securely leashed and not blocking seats or aisles. The measure also requires pet owners to keep animals well-behaved and under control, and it authorizes transit personnel to remove animals that are aggressive, disruptive, or otherwise create safety concerns. The bill is framed as an accessibility and humane-treatment measure, with findings stating that public transit is important for mobility, employment, education, healthcare, and community engagement, and that pet-friendly transit could reduce barriers to veterinary care and other essential services. It cites examples from other major cities as evidence that pet accommodation on transit can be managed safely with limits and oversight. The bill would take effect upon approval and would add a new section to Chapter 51 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes governing animals on mass transit. Its legal impact would be to create a statewide rule for mass transit systems in Hawaii regarding service animals and pet animals, supplementing existing transit policies with explicit rights and restrictions. It would preserve ADA-based access for service animals while also expanding access for non-service pets, subject to operational rules, safety exceptions, and owner liability for damage or injury caused by the animal. The bill also incorporates the existing statutory definition of “pet animal” from section 711-1100. General sentiment in the bill text is supportive of pet access on transit, emphasizing convenience, accessibility, and humane treatment. There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, so the available record does not show direct public or legislative opposition or support beyond the bill’s stated purpose. The main likely points of contention are operational and safety concerns: whether pets on transit could inconvenience riders, create hygiene or allergy issues, interfere with crowding, or impose enforcement burdens on transit personnel. Notable areas of debate would likely center on the distinction between service animals and non-service pets, the limits on peak-hour travel, and the authority of transit staff to deny access during emergencies or overcrowding. Liability provisions and the requirement that owners control their animals may also be important to transit agencies and riders concerned about risk and enforcement. Overall, the bill seeks to balance expanded pet access with rider safety and transit operations.

Impact

The bill would add a new section to Chapter 51, Hawaii Revised Statutes, governing animals on mass transit. It would codify unconditional access for ADA-defined service animals and establish statewide conditions under which non-service pet animals may ride public transit, including carrier requirements, leash rules, behavioral standards, removal authority, and owner liability. Transit agencies would need to align their policies and enforcement practices with these statutory requirements.

Sentiment

The bill’s stated purpose and findings reflect a generally favorable view of allowing pets on mass transit, presenting the measure as an accessibility and humane-treatment improvement. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented legislative debate in the materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears designed to expand access while preserving safety controls, suggesting a pragmatic rather than controversial approach.

Contention

The most likely points of contention are operational and safety-related. Transit agencies and riders may question whether allowing non-service pets—especially during peak hours—could create crowding, sanitation, allergy, noise, or enforcement problems. The bill gives transit personnel discretion to restrict access during emergencies or overcrowding, which suggests concern about balancing pet access with rider safety and transit reliability. Liability for animal-caused damage or injury and the distinction between service animals and pets are also likely areas of focus.

Companion Bills

HI SB1025

Carry Over Relating To Transportation.

Previously Filed As

HI SB1025

Relating To Transportation.

HI SB599

Relating To Transportation.

HI SB1521

Relating To Transportation.

HI SB195

Relating To Public Transportation.

HI HB667

Relating To Transportation.

HI SB220

Relating To Transportation Financing.

HI SB1644

Relating To Transportation.

HI SB1667

Relating To Transportation.

HI HB468

Relating To Transportation.

HI SB1209

Relating To Transportation.

Similar Bills

VA HB976

Person in temporary detention process; alternative transportation provider.

UT SB0310

Transportation Utility Fee Amendments

VA HB976

An Act to amend and reenact §§ 16.1-340.2 and 37.2-810, as it is currently effective and as it shall become effective, of the Code of Virginia, relating to transportation of person in the temporary detention process.

AZ SB1184

Transportation services employees; drivers; wages

MI SB0928

Health: licensing; behavioral health transportation licensing requirements; provide for. Amends 1974 PA 258 (MCL 330.1001 - 330.2106) by adding ch. 9B. TIE BAR WITH: SB 0927'26

CA AB1343

Local alternative transportation improvement program: Feather River crossing.

NJ S1249

Requires transportation network companies to share information concerning sexual misconduct investigation of driver; authorizes transportation network company to ban drivers from accessing digital network during and following investigation.

CA SB371

Transportation network companies: insurance coverage.