SB796 makes several changes to Hawaii law governing claims against the State that are presented to the Legislature for approval. First, it clarifies that claims for refunds, reimbursements, or other payments that are too old under the applicable statute of limitations may not be presented for legislative relief, and it requires the Attorney General to include in the annual claims package a total dollar value of possible judgments against the State that have not yet settled. It also requires consultation with the governor before any settlement agreement over $75,000 that still needs legislative approval.
The bill further expands the Attorney General’s reporting duties on claims against the State. The Attorney General’s pre-session report must now include more detailed information for each settled claim, including the conduct that led to the claim, recommended corrective action, a timeline for completing that action, whether the agency implemented the recommendation, and what remedial steps are taken or recommended if the agency does not act. In addition, the bill requires a follow-up report in 2026 and every five years thereafter on whether agencies experienced further incidents after corrective actions were implemented and why prior recommendations were insufficient. These reports are confidential and privileged communications to the Legislature.
Impact
SB796 amends sections 37-77 and 37-77.5 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, tightening the process for legislative claims against the State and increasing oversight of agency-caused claims. It limits the presentation of stale claims, adds a new disclosure requirement regarding unresolved potential judgments, and expands the Attorney General’s reporting obligations to the Legislature. The bill also creates a recurring five-year review mechanism to assess whether corrective actions reduced repeat incidents, affecting the Attorney General, state agencies, the comptroller, and claimants seeking legislative relief.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was received favorably in committee, passing Senate Judiciary 5-0 with amendments. The measure then advanced through second reading as amended and was referred onward, indicating general support for improving claims oversight and reporting. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so the broader discussion record is limited, but the procedural history points to a largely positive reception.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s tighter limits on claims and its expanded reporting and confidentiality requirements. Claimants with older refund or reimbursement requests may be affected by the prohibition on presenting claims beyond the applicable time limits, while agencies may face more detailed scrutiny of their conduct and corrective actions. Another possible issue is the balance between transparency and confidentiality: the bill requires more information to be reported to the Legislature, but keeps those reports confidential and privileged, which may draw differing views from those seeking public disclosure versus those prioritizing internal legislative oversight.