SB1637 amends the definition of “administrative act” in the Hawaii Revised Statutes section governing the Office of the Ombudsman. Under current law, the Ombudsman may review certain administrative actions by state agencies, but the bill would expressly add the lease of state lands, including non-agricultural park lands under chapter 166E, to the list of matters that qualify as administrative acts. The bill’s report title also describes the measure as expanding the Ombudsman’s authority to include leases of state agricultural lands, indicating an intent to broaden oversight of state land leasing decisions.
In practical terms, the bill would allow complaints or reviews involving state land leases to fall within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, potentially giving tenants, community members, and other affected parties an additional avenue to challenge or question leasing decisions. Because the change is made in the statutory definition itself, it would directly affect the scope of the Ombudsman’s investigative authority without creating a new agency or separate process. The bill takes effect upon approval.
Impact
The bill would amend section 96-1, Hawaii Revised Statutes, by expanding the statutory definition of “administrative act” for purposes of the Office of the Ombudsman. This would likely increase the range of state land lease matters subject to Ombudsman review, including leases of state lands and, according to the bill description, state agricultural land leases. The practical effect is to broaden oversight of state land management decisions and potentially expose those decisions to additional public scrutiny and complaint review.
Sentiment
The available record suggests generally favorable policy intent, with the bill framed as an oversight and accountability measure rather than a controversial substantive land-use change. However, the measure was deferred by the Senate Committee on GVO on February 6, 2025, indicating that while it may have support in principle, it did not advance at that stage. No vote tally or transcript is available to show broader support or opposition.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to be the scope of the Ombudsman’s authority over state land leases, especially leases involving agricultural lands and other state lands. Supporters would likely view the bill as improving transparency and accountability in state leasing decisions, while potential opponents may be concerned about expanding review authority into land-management or leasing processes that are already governed by other agencies or statutes. The committee deferral suggests unresolved questions about whether the expanded jurisdiction is appropriate or necessary.
Making Appropriations To Provide For The Expenses Of The Legislature, The Auditor, The Legislative Reference Bureau, The Ombudsman, And The Ethics Commission.