Transcript Highlights:

• I also want to thank the State Auditor's Office and the State Auditor himself for continuing to bring
• Now we'll move to the first panel with State Auditor Grant Parks and Senior Auditor Grayson Hugh.
• State Auditor Grant Parks and Senior Auditor Grayson Hugh. You could begin when ready.
• My name is Grant Parks, the State Auditor.
• But I appreciate this invitation to the state auditor.

Summary: The joint hearing of the Select Committee on Native American Affairs and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee focused on the University of California’s compliance with NAGPRA and CalNAGPRA and the return of Native American human remains and cultural items. Senators and Assembly Members opened by emphasizing the sacredness of repatriation, the ongoing trauma caused by delayed returns, and the need for stronger systemwide accountability. The State Auditor presented the third audit of UC’s repatriation efforts, concluding that UC still lacks the urgency, oversight, and clear timelines needed to promptly return remains and belongings. The audit found thousands of remains and hundreds of thousands of cultural items still in UC custody, new undisclosed collections at several campuses, weak budgeting and underspending, and repatriation plans that often lacked concrete deadlines. The auditor recommended stronger UCOP oversight, performance metrics, proactive searches for undiscovered items, and possible legislative action to tie funding to measurable progress. UC officials responded that the system is committed to full compliance and has accelerated its work since adopting a new policy in 2022. UC Provost Catherine Newman said the system repatriated more than 2,800 ancestors and nearly 80,000 funerary belongings in the past year, and that UC now says 80.3% of Native American remains are either repatriated or available for repatriation. UC announced a new systemwide plan to complete repatriation of human remains by the end of 2028, to finish high-risk campus reviews by June 2026, to recall all loans by January 2026, and to require quarterly reporting to UCOP. UC also said it will spend an additional $8.8 million over three years, expand staffing, improve databases, support tribal consultation costs, and identify potential reburial sites on UC land. Berkeley and San Diego described increased staffing, consultations, and repatriation activity, while Santa Barbara said it had corrected earlier omissions, notified tribes about previously unreported ancestors, and was working toward completing repatriations and updated inventories. Committee members pressed UC on why progress has been so slow, why the audit’s timelines differed from UC’s public reporting, and whether the 2028 goal applies only to human remains rather than all cultural items. UC said the 2028 target is for human remains, while cultural items will take longer, and acknowledged that more work remains. Members also asked about the technical expertise needed for repatriation, the role of tribal experts, and whether repatriation should be embedded more permanently in UC governance or statute. Tribal leaders and representatives then testified that remains and belongings were taken without consent and must be returned with tribal consent and leadership. They criticized the repeated delays, stressed that tribes are the experts on their ancestors and cultural heritage, and urged UC to treat repatriation as a top priority and to return all associated items, not just human remains, so ancestors can truly rest.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Anderson said that, as a former state auditor, she knew the issue well.
• Anderson said they had spoken with the current state auditor, Julie Blaha, about the bill.
• <00:51:43.520> auditor we did talk to the current state auditor we did talk to the current
• I served as Minnesota state auditor and I served as a commissioner in the Plenty administration.
• state auditor and a you bring a former state auditor and a business<01:37:24.000> person<01:37

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate File 856, which would create an Office of the Inspector General to combat fraud in state public programs. Representative Norris described the bill as the product of a long bipartisan, bicameral working group and emphasized the office’s independence, five-year term, Senate confirmation, removal-for-cause protections, authority to investigate entities receiving public funds, prevention-focused duties, and required public and annual reporting. Representative Anderson PE also thanked the bipartisan authors and staff, saying the bill was the result of extensive negotiations and should move forward without reopening the agreement. Members then considered several amendments. Norris offered a technical cleanup amendment, A44, to clarify language about embedding employees at the Department of Education, distinguish civil and criminal investigative authority, and update law-enforcement terminology; it was adopted. Anderson PE then offered and secured adoption of a technical amendment, A45, to correct a drafting error. Representative Cleorne offered A37 to add prepayment review procedures for all agencies, but it failed on a roll call, 65-67. Cleorne also offered A38 to appropriate $15 million for OIG modernization and data-sharing improvements, but withdrew it after noting it would be out of order. A39, which would have renamed the proposed law enforcement unit from an anti-fraud and waste bureau to an anti-fraud and enforcement unit, failed on a roll call, 66-67, after debate over whether “waste” should be included in the title and scope. During debate on the naming amendment, supporters argued the title should better reflect law-enforcement work and avoid implying the office was a “waste” agency, while opponents said the existing language reflected the bipartisan working-group agreement and that changing it could jeopardize the bill’s progress. Representative West cited inspector general standards that include waste among their duties, and Representative Pinto questioned the substantive basis for opposing the change. Later, Representative Mhler offered A41 to eliminate the future law-enforcement agency entirely, arguing it would be duplicative and unfunded; the transcript cuts off before the vote on that amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is very historic and very important to the State of Florida as well.
• This is the state positions view.
• This is the state position. in the GAA. This is the state positions view.
• Again, this is state agency payments.
• Prior university and state employee salaries were required.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to receive updates on Transparency Florida and related transparency tools. The Governor’s Office and the Department of Financial Services described the Transparency Florida website, the state payment and contract systems, and the local-government financial reporting system (Logger X/XBRL), emphasizing public access, searchable payment and contract data, downloadable reports, and ongoing upgrades. Members asked whether school districts and the Department of Corrections are included in these systems; staff explained that state agencies like Corrections are covered through Transparency Florida, FACTS, and the state financial reports, while Logger X is for local governments. Committee staff reported that the Transparency Florida Act’s requirements have been met and noted that any new recommendations would need legislative action; members were invited to submit recommendations by October 30. The committee then reviewed repeated audit findings for local governments and educational entities. Staff explained the statutory process for “three-peat” findings: first requesting an updated written corrective-action status, then possibly requiring an appearance before the committee, and finally taking further action if findings remain uncorrected. Most entities were recommended for written updates, while the City of Daytona Beach was singled out for an in-person appearance because of a repeated finding involving unexpended building permit balances. Members also raised questions about specific entities, including McIntosh, White Springs, Pahokee, and the Fred R. Wilson Memorial Law Library special district, with staff explaining the nature of the findings and noting that some entities may warrant further review. The committee adopted a motion to accept staff’s recommendations and to send letters to entities with uncorrected audit findings in late-filed 2023-24 audit reports. It also approved a motion directing the Auditor General and OPPAGA to conduct the required audit of the Department of the Lottery for fiscal year 2025-26, with the Auditor General handling financial, internal control, and compliance work and OPPAGA preparing operational recommendations. The meeting concluded with notice that the next meeting was tentatively scheduled for November 3 at 3:30 p.m., followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, state appropriations only cover approximately 30% of our needs, which means our auditors are
• Here is the average salary at each job level for other state auditor offices in our region. compared
• Now, currently, our salaries are about 73% of other regional state auditor office salaries.
• The state auditor can only have a balance of $850,000 in the revolving fund at the end of the fiscal
• In the next state auditor who takes over will be able to continue to bring people on and meet the needs

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• One way, one suggestion could be we do have a state auditor. They're pretty overworked.
• The state auditor, the comptroller's office as well is supposed to have an audit function.
• But perhaps we ask the state auditor to create a working group and dialogue with the stakeholders and
• But maybe we task the state auditor with coming up and coming back to this body within a time certain
• The state auditor, I agree, is one of my favorite functions as well.

Summary: The committee heard several privacy and consumer protection bills, with most of the discussion focused on AI and social media. AB 1405 would create a state registry for AI auditors and set basic transparency, ethics, and qualification standards for those auditors; supporters said it would build trust and provide a foundation for future AI oversight, while some members questioned whether government should define auditor qualifications instead of industry groups. The bill was moved out on a 5-1 vote to Appropriations, with the roll left open. AB 2, by Assemblymember Lowenthal, would impose enhanced financial penalties on large social media companies when their negligence causes harm to children and teens. Supporters, including a grieving parent and Common Sense Media, argued the bill would create accountability for harmful algorithms and design choices, while opponents from TechNet, EFF, CCIA, and CalChamber warned it was vague, could chill speech, invite censorship, and raise Section 230 and First Amendment concerns. Committee members debated private right of action versus public enforcement, possible shakedown lawsuits, and whether the bill should be narrowed; the bill passed 6-0 to Judiciary with the roll left open. AB 410 would expand California’s bot disclosure law so bots must identify themselves up front and truthfully if asked, rather than only prohibiting deceptive bots in limited commercial or election contexts. Supporters said the measure would help users, especially youth and vulnerable people, know when they are interacting with AI and reduce deception online; one privacy group withdrew opposition after amendments, and other industry groups said they were no longer opposed or had no formal position. The bill passed 9-1 to Appropriations with the roll left open. The committee also approved AB 1327, which lets consumers cancel home improvement contracts by email instead of only by mail and requires phone assistance for cancellations; the Contractor State License Board withdrew opposition after amendments, and the bill passed 11-0 to Judiciary with the roll left open.

Transcript Highlights:

• We tried to track it with the auditors. And they deposited.
• I know our auditors came in and they said we can't believe how awesome... ...our auditors came in and
• Now, if this is state, do we have, does the state demand if the governor give some money Does the state
• From the state of Arkansas? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you.
• Then turn that to the state. Okay. Any other comments? It on it and turn that to the state. Okay.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Despite the importance of transfer, the state auditor again finds that California's current transfer
• So we're going to hear from our state auditor on this audit and what he recommends going forward.
• So it was my hope that with the findings, the state auditor would offer some recommendations.
• So it was my hope that with the findings, the state auditor would offer some recommendations.
• I want to also thank the state auditor and the staff for a tremendous audit.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm your Auditor General.
• I think the Auditor General was very professional.
• We do have state statute in Section 14-1733.
• Chair, how many states are you all in? We are in all 50 states. Okay. Yeah, thank you.
• The Auditor General noted that The Auditor General noted that Maricopa County has spent roughly $500,000

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee heard presentations on Arizona’s school safety interoperability communication systems, beginning with remarks from Senator Kevin Payne, who described the program as a response to school shootings and 911 overloads, and said the goal is to let schools trigger a panic-button alert that immediately shares video, floor plans, and location information with law enforcement and other responders. Several members echoed support for the concept, while also raising concerns about whether the systems are actually working as intended and whether school resource officers remain necessary or should be supplemented by technology. Auditor General Lindsay Perry summarized the JLAC-directed special audit, explaining that the office reviewed whether fund expenditures were authorized, whether purchased systems met statutory requirements, and whether procurement followed applicable standards. She said the office had tested a sample of systems with vendors, schools, and law enforcement, and that some agencies had not provided requested follow-up information. Members questioned Pinal County’s lack of response and the status of its reports and payments, and committee leaders criticized the county sheriff’s claim that the committee had treated staff unfairly. Representatives from Mutualink, Motorola Solutions, and Navigate 360 then defended their systems and described implementation challenges. Mutualink said its platform connects schools, dispatch, and responders across jurisdictions and claimed it can reduce response times, but acknowledged that implementation depends on training, infrastructure, and cooperation among schools and agencies. Motorola said it had deployed systems in Maricopa and Yuma counties and that some delays stemmed from school participation and procurement issues. Navigate 360 highlighted Cochise County as a success story, saying 60 of 69 schools were implemented and that the company had added maps, emergency management tools, and training support after audit findings. Members repeatedly pressed the vendors on statutory criteria, procurement practices, rural infrastructure, and why some counties or schools were not fully operational; the vendors generally said the biggest barriers were local readiness, training, and interagency coordination rather than the technology itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Robin Monaga, State Ombudsman.
• Next is the Office of the Auditor. Good afternoon. I'm Les Kondo, the auditor.
• With me today is Daria Lee Goo, the deputy auditor.
• resources, which include State funds.
• resources which include using State resources which include State<00:13:49.079> funds<00:13:49.959

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So now we'll proceed to the State Auditor for the status report.
• Are there questions for the State Auditor?
• State Auditor, in the meantime, now is the time to present your analysis.
• This is exactly why the California State Auditor is the right entity for this work.
• Controller would be duplicative of the work being asked to be done by the State Auditor.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee met to hear new audit requests and receive a status update from the State Auditor. The auditor reported 10 JALAC audits in progress, noted that all 2025-approved audits are underway, said the first 2026 audit is focused on DMV license revocations, and described several statutory and high-risk audits already in progress. The committee also approved a consent calendar of four audit requests: UC library resources, law enforcement information sharing, EDD unemployment insurance claims, and Housing and Community Development housing development monitoring. The committee then considered Assembly Member DeMaio’s audit request on SANDAG road project management. DeMaio argued the audit was needed to examine whether transportation funds, including voter-approved and restricted revenues, were used for allowable purposes and whether past management failures warranted outside review. SANDAG’s CEO and CFO said the agency already undergoes extensive oversight and audits, that funds are tracked by multiple “colors of money,” and that internal controls have improved. Several members questioned whether the issues were already addressed in public records or existing audits, and the request failed on a roll call vote. Next, Senator Valadares presented an audit of the Board of State and Community Corrections’ Proposition 47 grant administration, arguing that more transparency is needed on outcomes, recidivism data, and oversight of grantees. The BSCC said it already has oversight mechanisms, that the State Controller conducts biennial audits, and that program data shows positive outcomes. The committee approved the audit unanimously. Senator Cortese then presented an audit of CalHR’s dental benefits procurement and Delta Dental contract, citing long-standing benefit caps, provider network concerns, and retiree out-of-pocket costs. CalHR said its network remains strong, that it recently completed an RFP adding MetLife as a second carrier starting in 2027, and that contracts include performance guarantees. Members from both parties expressed concern about access and competition, and the audit was approved unanimously. The committee then completed add-on votes on the consent calendar and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• state their name, affiliation, and position.
• State your name, affiliation, and position. Good morning, Chair and members.
• State your name, affiliation, and position. Good morning, Chair and members.
• I'm a state employee, and I fully support this bill. Thank you. Good morning.
• In classified job classifications, within represented job classifications.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• read uh what the amendment states. Mr. read uh what the amendment states. Mr.
• employees or officers of the state? employees or officers of the state?
• That's what's expected of us as officers of the state to protect the resources of the state.
• So it's state false claims act.
• >> State your point of order. >> State your point of order.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House first adopted non-controversial motions, then approved an urgency motion to suspend the rules so Senate File 4476, the human services program integrity package, could move quickly to conference committee before the end of session. The House then adopted a DE amendment to insert House language into the bill, and proceeded to debate several amendments focused on program integrity, fraud prevention, and reporting requirements in human services programs. Representative Schultz offered Amendment A5 to remove a sunset on the periodic data matching report requirement, arguing the report helps ensure only eligible people receive medical assistance and welfare benefits and should continue to be delivered annually. Supporters said the report had been inconsistently delivered, cited past findings of ineligible recipients, and framed the amendment as a low-cost accountability measure. Opponents, including Representative Nor, said the report had been sent to the chairs, that the issue should be handled through broader HR1-related changes and negotiations with the Senate, and that the amendment was not the right vehicle. After roll call, A5 failed on a 63-67 vote. Schultz then offered Amendment A6, which would require reporting on homelessness programs, including how many people are served, total costs, outcomes, and possible recoupment of funds if reporting is inadequate. Schultz said the state spends tens of millions on homelessness programs without clear results and that better data would help the legislature make decisions and protect taxpayers. Several members supported the idea of more accountability, while others said the state already receives reports, that homelessness work is being done in partnership with stakeholders, and that the amendment was not the best approach. The discussion continued with further comments on homelessness data and program oversight, but no final vote on A6 is shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• The quote was, "We legislative auditor.
• And I would the business of this state.
• um it obviously applies to state um it obviously applies to state employees,<00:03:33.640> um
• within the state agencies. within the state agencies. Representative<00:17:45.320> Brandt.
• state agency. state agency. Mr.<00:20:46.080> Lipinski.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So there's a lot less revenue for the state of New Hampshire or the states, for that matter.
• Hampshire or the states for that matter. Hampshire or the states for that matter.
• getting a title from out of state. getting a title from out of state.
• They cross state lines. They come in from all surrounding states into New Hampshire.
• the laws when they're in this state. the laws when they're in this state.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I will call this meeting of the House State Government Finance and Policy Committee to order on Thursday
• Thank you for listening, and I'm looking forward to... neighboring state neighboring state those<00:02
• <00:03:23.120> that budget section two states that budget section two states that organization
• criminal offense relating to a state criminal offense relating to a state Grant<00:05:04.080>
• There's a general whistleblower protection statute under state labor law.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House State Government Finance and Policy Committee met on January 23, 2025, approved the minutes from January 21, and took up House File 2, a bill on mandatory fraud reporting and grant oversight. Representative Davis described the bill as requiring state agencies to report suspected fraud to law enforcement and legislative leaders, post organizational charts online, conduct unannounced site visits for grant recipients, require reporting of grant violations, and suspend or terminate grant agreements when recipients are charged with or convicted of related crimes. No testifiers were present. Committee members asked about how the reporting requirements would work, whether the bill should reference inspectors general or other law enforcement channels, and whether whistleblower protections would cover employees making reports. Representative Joy suggested the bill should halt funding immediately when fraud is reported, while Representative Ston raised the possibility of including contract employees. The committee administrator said the general whistleblower statute likely applies, but would follow up if needed. Representative Anderson noted that the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits was listed as an opponent and asked about any outreach; Representative Davis said he was surprised and had not been contacted directly. The chair said the bill would be laid over because no fiscal note was yet available, and encouraged further discussion with members and the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits before the bill returns. The chair then moved on to a brief discussion of the governor’s budget proposal, noting that several agencies had declined to appear, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The large beneficiaries, are they mostly in-state or out-of-state companies?
• The figures that you saw today are all for in-state taxable activity, so these would be in-state.
• These organizations build throughout Washington State.
• Two legislative auditor recommendations.
• like that in other states.

Summary: The Citizens Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on August 6, 2025, with five commissioners present and a quorum. The commission approved the May 7, 2025 meeting minutes and welcomed new commissioner Scott Edwards, who introduced himself. Staff also confirmed the September meeting date had been changed to September 22, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. to accommodate his schedule, and noted that testimony questions for the public hearing would be used at that meeting. JLARC staff then presented preliminary 2025 tax preference performance reviews covering nine preferences. For natural gas used as a transportation fuel, staff said the preferences reduce fuel costs but do not meet emissions-reduction goals, and recommended continuing the public utility tax and natural gas use tax exemptions while modifying reporting requirements; they also recommended continuing the marine-use LNG sales tax exemption and considering the Department of Revenue work group’s findings. For travel agents and tour operators, staff said the small-beneficiary rate appears to support smaller firms, while the larger-beneficiary rate should be reviewed and both should have clearer objectives and metrics. For nonprofit low-income housing development, staff said the preference is helping produce housing but the current metric does not align well with the objective, data/reporting problems remain, and the legislature should decide whether to continue and possibly modify the exemption, including considering annual renewal. Staff also reviewed the multipurpose senior citizen centers exemption, concluding it meets its objective and recommending continuation, with possible consideration of making it permanent. For disabled veteran adapted housing, staff said the preference has very low uptake despite eligible veterans and recommended continuing it but modifying it in consultation with the Department of Veterans Affairs to improve use. For trade convention attendance, staff said the preference aligns Washington with other states and recommended continuation. For agricultural fertilizer and seed wholesaling, staff said the exemption reduces tax layering and recommended continuation, with clarification on whether it is exempt from expiration/performance-statement requirements. For agricultural crop protection products, staff said the preference met its revenue-growth metric and recommended extending it while considering better metrics or recategorizing it as tax relief. Finally, for energy sales to a silicon smelter, staff said the preferences were unused because the facility was never built and recommended allowing them to expire. The meeting ended with reminders about written testimony and the September public testimony session.

Transcript Highlights:

• forth<00:32:09.840> a the state auditor who puts forth a the state auditor who puts forth
• Their equivalent of the legislative auditor in Colorado is called the state auditor.
• > produce called the state auditor um they produce called the state auditor um they produce an
• report and the the Colorado state report and the the Colorado state auditor<01:04:59.400> presents
• their budget request the Colorado state their budget request the Colorado state auditor<01:05:18.960

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met briefly to approve the January 16 minutes, then heard a series of informational presentations from legislative joint offices and commissions that fall under its jurisdiction. Michelle Urick of the Legislative Coordinating Commission explained the LCC’s governance structure, including its leadership-based membership and role overseeing joint offices such as the Legislative Auditor, Legislative Budget Office, Legislative Reference Library, Revisor of Statutes, and the LCC staff office itself. Christian Larson of the Legislative Budget Office described the office’s nonpartisan fiscal note work, local impact notes, and support for the Tax Expenditure Review Commission, noting the volume of requests it handles and that the office currently has 18 budgeted FTE. He also explained the LBO Oversight Commission’s role in setting standards and appointing the director. Elizabeth Lincoln of the Legislative Reference Library outlined the library’s services, including answering thousands of reference questions, maintaining state policy and legislative collections, archiving state documents, supporting the legislative website and search tools, and preserving House and Senate audio, video, and committee minutes. She also noted the library’s staffing levels and its move to the Capitol. In response to a question, she said copies of the book Minnesota Standoff were in constant circulation, that the title is out of print, and that the library had digitized it for use by legislators and staff. Ryan Inman, the Revisor of Statutes, described the office’s drafting, legal review, publication, IT, and other services. He said every bill introduced is reviewed by a Revisor attorney, the office publishes Laws of Minnesota, Minnesota Statutes, and Minnesota Rules, and it maintains the legislative drafting system now being replaced. He also discussed rule drafting for agencies, legal counsel, the claims subcommittee, court opinions reports, and the annual technical Revisor bill. Members asked about bill volume, amendment drafting, and the history of administrative rules review; Inman said the office is handling over 2,500 active bill requests and that a prior commission on administrative rules existed in the past. No votes were taken beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the state will fund those programs if they meet the criteria.
• This beautiful state.
• Stop mixing up the money, the Auditor General said.
• And the Auditor General will do that on an annual basis.
• And it allows us to advance our state.

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several introductions, including recognition of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority’s Founders’ Day and a visiting debate student. The chamber then received and adopted, by a 39-0 vote, a committee report confirming 52 gubernatorial executive appointments to various state, regional, and local boards and commissions. The first major bill was SB 250 on rural communities, described as a broad “Rural Renaissance” package. Sponsor Senator Simon outlined provisions creating an Office of Rural Prosperity, a Renaissance Grant Program for counties facing population loss, housing and transportation investments, additional funding for rural education, and rural health care support. Two amendments were adopted to remove overlapping grant language tied to new federal rural health funding and to update hospital funding estimates. Senators from both parties generally supported the bill, though some raised questions about eligibility for certain rural areas and how funds would be accessed. The bill passed 39-0. The Senate then took up CS/SB 318 on educational scholarship programs. Senator Gates said the bill responds to Auditor General findings by separating scholarship funding from public school funding, requiring student identification and enrollment verification, reducing administrative fees for scholarship funding organizations, requiring annual audits, and directing the Department of Education to develop a competitive selection and performance-based business plan for those organizations. Three amendments were adopted, including changes to the stabilization fund and documentation requirements. Senators from both parties debated transparency, accountability, and implementation concerns, with some also urging future attention to declining-enrollment school districts and the quality of scholarship providers. The bill passed 38-0. At the end of the session, the Senate waived rules to immediately certify SB 250 and CS/SB 318 to the House, welcomed Palm Beach County visitors in the gallery, and adjourned until the next scheduled meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• the state government. the state government.
• Senate Bill 84, No Waiver for Legal Privileges, State Auditor Documents, approved Monday, April 20th,
• <03:11:25.840> State<03:11:26.000> auditor legal privileges.
• State auditor legal privileges.
• State auditor documents<03:11:26.640> approved<03:11:26.880> on<03:11:27.040> Monday

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• State of Hawaii Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and comments in person.
• article 7 section 5 of the Hawaii state article 7 section 5 of the Hawaii state constitution<01:
• Um, 97% of those in the state are entities, and the concern that was brought up by Mr.
• Um, 97% of those in the state are entities, and the concern that was brought up by Mr.
• <01:44:37.000> historic not complied with State historic not complied with State historic

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Housing Committee heard testimony on several housing-related bills. On SB 26, SD 2, relating to affordable housing, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development explained a prior transit-oriented development study that identified roughly 59,000 possible units and about 25,000 affordable units from known projects, and said the bill would help fill gaps by evaluating additional public lands for housing suitability and possible co-use with existing facilities. Members asked about the need for resources and staffing to do that work, and OPSD said it would need time and consultant support to carry it out. Testimony on the bill included support from state and county housing agencies and comments from planning and land use entities. On SB 66, SD 2, relating to housing and historic preservation review, SHPD and OHA both testified. SHPD said the bill would not override existing burial-site protections and that county staff with proper qualifications could make historic-property determinations locally, while OHA asked for clearer language requiring consultation when Native Hawaiian historic sites are involved and clearer procedures if an adverse effect is found. Committee members and SHPD discussed whether the bill should explicitly preserve existing Chapter 6E processes, whether counties have qualified staff, and how quickly a county would have to decide if it cannot complete the review itself and must use a third-party reviewer. Supporters said the measure could speed permitting and keep decisions local; one opponent argued it could rush approvals and strain infrastructure. The committee also heard support from housing, construction, business, and food-industry groups, and opposition from some preservation and community advocates. The committee then heard SB 332, SD 1, on foreclosure-related protections, with testimony focused on Lānaʻi and concerns about speculative real estate after the foreclosure moratorium ended. SB 414, SD 2, on restoring access to disaster-affected areas, drew support from HHFDC, DHS, and the Maui Chamber; HHFDC noted DOH plans for a temporary paved access road to the Kayola temporary housing site and said agencies were discussing which parcels would be needed. On SB 102, SD 2, relating to affordable housing and third-party historic review, SHPD said it would need to do more upfront screening and that the bill’s timelines and third-party provisions should be clearer; OHA said the measure should include a sunset and better staffing, and asked that the department fill positions to meet review demand. No votes or final committee actions were reported in the transcript.