Transcript Highlights:

• Redistricting with six ayes, one nay, one present not voting, and one absent from the vote.
• Senate Bill 4, before you today, meets the one-vote standard.
• They're voting no on that. They're voting no on that. They're in the building. Thank you.
• warning systems, especially in these flash flow prone areas.
• There's multiple MesoNet systems.

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum call, invocation, and approval of the previous day’s journal, then observed a moment of silence after Senator Eckhardt referenced a mass shooting in Austin. The chamber also agreed to postpone reading and referral of bills until later in the day. Early procedural business included a motion not to print Senate Bill 3, which was adopted without objection. Later, Senator Mendez raised a parliamentary inquiry about moving flood relief bills to the top of the calendar, but the presiding officer said the order of business was up to the chair. The main floor action centered on Senate Bill 4, the congressional redistricting bill. Senator King laid out the bill, describing it as the companion to the House version, based on 2020 census data, and arguing it was legal, race-blind, more compact, and likely to elect more Republicans. Senators asked extensive questions about the process, public hearings, and the map’s effects on districts and communities. The Senate voted to suspend the regular order of business and the three-day rule, then passed SB 4 to engrossment and finally passed it, with the recorded votes showing 19 yeas and 2 nays. The Senate also took up Senate Bill 6, relating to abortion and civil liability for the manufacture and provision of abortion-inducing drugs. Senator Hughes argued the bill was needed to stop illegal abortion pills being mailed into Texas and harming women and unborn children. The Senate suspended the regular order of business and the three-day rule, passed the bill to engrossment, and then finally passed it, with the recorded votes showing 18 yeas, 10 nays, and one present not voting. A lengthy discussion followed on the committee substitute for Senate Bill 14, which would standardize law enforcement personnel and departmental files statewide. Senator King said the bill codifies a TCOLE model policy and limits public access to personnel files to substantiated misconduct, commendations, and evaluations, while keeping other records available through other legal processes. Senators Eckhardt, West, Hinojosa, and others questioned how the bill would affect transparency, meet-and-confer agreements, civilian review boards, and access to unsubstantiated complaints. An amendment by Senator Hinojosa of Dallas to narrow the bill to unfounded complaints failed, and SB 14 was then passed to engrossment on a vote of 18 yeas and 10 nays. The final major item was Senate Bill 1, the natural disaster omnibus bill responding to the July flooding. Senator Perry said the bill addresses camp and RV park safety, evacuation plans, emergency rooftop access, lines of succession for local emergency management, annual drills, volunteer management, drone restrictions over disaster areas, small-business recovery loans, and a statewide data hub for flood and weather monitoring. Senators Menendez, Eckhardt, and Kolkhorst asked about autopsies, volunteer background checks, liability, warning systems, floodplain mitigation, and coordination with FEMA and local governments. Perry said the bill focuses on preparation, response, and recovery, while broader prevention and mitigation issues may be addressed later. The transcript ends during this extended discussion, before final action on SB 1 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• system system um is um within the legal system system um is really<00:13:31.120> the<00:13:31.279
• members if not Vice chair for the vote members if not Vice chair for the vote voting<02:17:53.240
• <02:23:30.399> voting concerns Vice chair for the vote voting concerns Vice chair for the
• vote voting on House Vice chair for the vote voting on House Bill<02:35:04.240> 900<02:35:05.439
• members if not Vice chair for the vote members if not Vice chair for the vote voting<02:36:08.359

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 1324, which would require the Judiciary to contract for legal services for residential tenants in landlord-tenant disputes and allow attorneys, paralegals, and law students to provide those services, with an appropriation. The Department of the Attorney General recommended removing reference to Hawaii Public Housing Authority tenants because HPHA eviction proceedings are administrative and could conflict with the bill. Hawaii Appleseed and other testifiers strongly supported the measure, citing studies showing much higher tenant retention when counsel is available, and suggested adding notice of the right to counsel at key points such as rent increases, eviction notices, and lease signing. The committee adopted amendments, including the Attorney General’s suggested change and a technical amendment, and passed the bill out with a recommendation to move it forward; members voted aye, with one member voting with reservations and several excused. The committee then heard House Bill 126 on property forfeiture, which would increase transparency and accountability in civil asset forfeiture by clarifying covered property, changing disposition rules, and removing language requiring liberal construction of the forfeiture act. The Attorney General said forfeiture remains an important law enforcement tool and that the bill would not impair its use. The Office of the Public Defender supported the measure but argued civil forfeiture is broadly problematic because many people cannot meaningfully challenge it and are not entitled to counsel. Honolulu Police Department opposed the bill, saying forfeiture is useful in fighting illegal activity and that added procedures would delay enforcement and reduce operational funding from forfeiture proceeds. Community Alliance on Prisons, the Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, and other supporters urged reform or abolition of civil forfeiture, citing transparency concerns and the risk of abuse. No vote on HB 126 was taken in the portion provided. The final measure discussed was House Bill 166, which would require the state to defend professionally licensed or certified state employees in certain civil actions, allow employees to hire their own counsel at their own expense, and set a process for the Attorney General to transfer or withdraw representation if the state declines to defend. Testimony from the Hawaii Association for Justice and labor representatives was in strong support, describing the bill as a negotiated clarification that balances employee protections with accountability and noting it had passed previously but died in conference. The transcript cuts off before any committee action on HB 166.

Transcript Highlights:

• Have all senators voted? Secretary will lock the board and record the vote.
• Have all senators voted? Have all senators voted?
• So I'm going to vote yes.
• And they're the ones that, when they vote for this or not vote for this, The ones that, when they vote
• The senators will proceed to vote. If all senators have voted, lock the board.

Summary: The Senate took up Committee Substitute for Senate Joint Resolution 2F, a proposed constitutional amendment on property tax reform. The measure would increase the homestead exemption in stages, lower the assessment cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, and limit county and municipal ad valorem tax revenues to specified uses such as public safety, education, infrastructure, natural resources, debt service, employee benefits, and certain administrative costs. Supporters, led by Senator Avila, argued the proposal would provide meaningful property tax relief and push local governments to rein in spending, while opponents warned it would shift costs to fees, reduce local flexibility, and threaten funding for core services. Several amendments were offered and rejected. Senator Sharief proposed an income-based circuit breaker for property tax relief; Senator Smith offered a sunset clause; and Senator Berman proposed revising the ballot statement to better match the amended proposal and remove outdated references. Each amendment failed on recorded votes. During questioning and debate, senators pressed Avila on the ballot language, the effect on local services, whether the legislature could later restrict local spending by statute, and whether renters would benefit. Avila said the ballot language was not his and repeatedly stated he was presenting the governor’s proposal, while also saying local governments would need to prioritize budgets and that future legislatures could address implementation details. After the amendment votes, the joint resolution was read a third time and moved into final debate. Supporters said the proposal would give homeowners relief and force fiscal discipline at the local level. Opponents, including Senators Nathan, Bracey Davis, Smith, Polsky, and Errington, argued the measure was rushed, lacked a completed fiscal analysis or replacement revenue, and could harm police, fire, libraries, parks, housing, and other local services. They also criticized the ballot summary as misleading, especially regarding the staged homestead exemption increase. The transcript ends during debate, before any final vote on the joint resolution itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• We urge you to vote in favor of SB 1528.
• We urge you to vote in favor of SB 1528.
• That makes sense in a system of the process.
• And in a system of the process.
• And by your Vote >> Chair right?