Hawaii House Bill HB1166

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/23/25
• Refer: 1/23/25
• Report Pass: 2/14/25
• Refer: 2/14/25
• Report Pass: 2/28/25
• Engrossed: 2/28/25
• Refer: 3/4/25
• Refer: 2/2/26
• Report Pass: 3/18/26
• Refer: 3/18/26
• Report Pass: 4/9/26

Caption

RELATING TO AUTOMATED SPEED ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS PROGRAM.

Summary

HB1166 is an appropriations bill for Hawaii’s Automated Speed Enforcement Systems Program. It directs money from the state highway fund into the program’s special fund and then appropriates money from that special fund for fiscal year 2026-2027 to establish and maintain the program, with the Department of Transportation responsible for spending the funds. The bill also provides that the appropriation will not lapse at the end of the fiscal year, but any unexpended and unencumbered balance remaining as of June 30, 2029, will revert to the state highway fund. The bill does not create the automated speed enforcement program itself; rather, it funds the program under existing law and supports its implementation and ongoing operation. The measure is structured as a fiscal vehicle tied to the state highway fund and the dedicated special fund created for automated speed enforcement, and it is labeled with an effective date of July 1, 3000, which appears to function as a placeholder rather than a practical operative date.

Impact

HB1166 would affect state finances and the administration of Hawaii’s automated speed enforcement framework by moving highway fund dollars into the Automated Speed Enforcement Systems Program Special Fund and authorizing the Department of Transportation to use those funds for program establishment and maintenance. It would not directly amend traffic enforcement penalties or substantive speed-limit laws, but it would support the infrastructure needed to operate automated speed cameras or similar enforcement systems. The bill also includes a nonlapse provision and a sunset-style reversion of unused balances to the highway fund in 2029.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests broad support and little opposition. The Senate Transportation Committee passed the bill with amendments by a 3-0 vote, and the Senate Ways and Means Committee later passed it unamended by a 12-0 vote. No committee transcript was provided, but the unanimous votes indicate the measure was generally viewed favorably as a funding mechanism for traffic safety enforcement.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials, and there were no recorded dissenting votes in the committee actions shown. Any likely debate would center on the policy and practical implications of automated speed enforcement itself, such as traffic safety benefits, privacy concerns, fairness of camera-based citations, and the use of highway fund revenues for enforcement rather than roadway projects. However, those concerns are not explicitly reflected in the available transcripts or votes.