RELATING TO THE LEGISLATURE.
SB2343 establishes a temporary Regular Session Review Working Group to study whether and how the Hawaii Legislature could lengthen its annual regular session, including the possibility of adding recess days or otherwise moving from the current mid-January to early-May calendar to a longer schedule. The bill is framed as a follow-up to a Legislative Reference Bureau study requested by H.C.R. No. 138, and it directs the working group to evaluate the feasibility of longer sessions for both election and non-election years.
The working group is tasked with examining the fiscal, operational, legal, and staffing implications of a longer session, including office space, legislative services, and compensation-related issues. It must also identify any needed constitutional, statutory, or rule changes, review other states’ practices, and consider the bureau’s report in developing recommendations and proposed legislation. The group is required to report to the Legislature before the 2028 regular session and is dissolved on June 30, 2028.
The bill does not immediately change the length of legislative sessions or amend the constitution; instead, it creates a study and recommendation process that could lead to future changes in legislative procedure, session scheduling, and possibly constitutional, statutory, or rules revisions. It also appropriates $100,000 each from general revenues for the Senate and House to support the working group, and exempts certain contracts from chapter 103D procurement requirements and the working group from part I of chapter 92, Hawaii Revised Statutes.
The available legislative history suggests generally favorable support for the bill at the committee stage. It passed Senate Government Operations unanimously, 4-0, with amendments, and the measure advanced to Ways and Means after second reading. The bill’s findings reflect a cautious, exploratory approach rather than an immediate push to overhaul the legislative calendar, which may have helped it attract support.
The main point of contention is not whether to study the issue, but whether Hawaii should ultimately move to a longer or continuous legislative session and what that would require. The bill itself acknowledges that there is no simple model to adopt and that significant constitutional, statutory, operational, and budgetary changes could be needed. Potential concerns include increased costs, staffing and office-space demands, impacts on legislative services, and the need to preserve timely passage of fiscal bills before July 1. The inclusion of procurement exemptions and appropriations may also draw scrutiny, though no specific opposition is reflected in the provided record.