Transcript Highlights:

• artists we're standing on our testimony artists we're standing on our testimony and<00:32:19.320
• <00:38:03.400> the and if I can pull up my testimony the and if I can pull up my testimony
• You have our testimony in support of this bill. We'll stand on our written testimony.
• stand on our written testimony stand on our written testimony supporting<01:10:39.360> the
• testimony on that a lot of the testimony testimony on that a lot of the testimony also<01:15:00.800

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection met on February 20, 2025, and heard testimony on several measures. HB 850, relating to condominiums, drew support from the Community Associations Institute and the Hawaii State Association of Parliamentarians, who said it would improve owner participation, clarify voting rules, and preserve the use of proxies as a personal choice. A Zoom testifier supported the bill’s intent but warned that special meetings can be abused and suggested further amendments to address board president authority. Members asked about proxies versus electronic voting and whether the bill would reduce proxy use; no vote was taken. The committee also heard HB 48 on coffee labeling, with the Department of Agriculture in support, and HB 1370 on taxation, where a local brewery representative supported equal tax treatment for beer served from 5-gallon kegs and larger kegs when dispensed from a faucet, arguing the bill would clarify draft beer treatment and encourage sustainability. HB 1422 on motor carriers received comments from the Public Utilities Commission and the Department of State Parks, while representatives from a community-based shuttle initiative supported the bill and said nonprofit, community-led transportation solutions should not be regulated like traditional carriers. HB 874, relating to child performers, received support from SAG-AFTRA, IATSE, and individual performers, who emphasized protecting minors’ earnings, safety, and schooling. Testimony also discussed whether to include social media influencers and whether to add annual income limits or trust-account protections; the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations said the issue was outside its wheelhouse. Later, HB 799 on healthcare drew support from health plans and HMSA, with the Department of Health requesting amendments such as a sunset date, a Maui-only pilot, and a report back before changing its position. HB 1379 on health received support from Hawaii Pacific Health, but the Hawaii Medical Board raised concerns about vague language and public-safety implications for internationally trained physicians, asking for more time to study national licensing recommendations. Finally, HB 439 on education was heard, with the Hawaii Teacher Standards Board opposing the bill as drafted and warning about licensing standards and predatory third-party loans affecting J-1 teachers; the transcript ends before any action or vote on these measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, there's testimony from uh Phil Nerney and Richard Emery in their testimony today that says you guys
• 51.800> uh<00:11:52.120> Phil So, there's testimony from uh Phil So, there's testimony
• going to stand on our written testimony going to stand on our written testimony providing<00:36:
• Is that for all— question based on your testimony. If question based on your testimony.
• <00:58:51.960> drawing at the bottom of my testimony drawing at the bottom of my testimony

Bills: SB2433, SB2047, SB2425, SB3045, SB2761, SB3001, SB2852, SB2471

Keywords: condominium governance, education trust fund, unit owners, real estate, dispute resolution, financial obligations, community representation, pharmacy benefit managers, maximum allowable cost, transparency, drug pricing, insurance commissioner, contracting pharmacies, healthcare, substance use disorder, SUD, addiction treatment, behavioral health, mental health, rehabilitation

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 2433 SD1 relating to condominiums, which would direct the condominium education trust fund toward educational resources for unit owners and require the Real Estate Commission to ensure owners’ interests are represented in funded activities and related rulemaking. Supporters, including the Hawaii Real Estate Commission and a condominium owner advocate, said owners need a seat at the table in condo governance and education efforts. Committee discussion focused on whether the bill was necessary, with the Real Estate Commission indicating it could already use the trust fund for owner education and that owners are already considered stakeholders, though not through a specific commission seat. No vote was taken during the excerpted discussion. The committee then took up SB 2047 SD2 HD1 on pharmacy benefit managers, which would set requirements for maximum allowable cost reimbursement, allow reverse-and-rebill claims after successful appeals, and authorize fines for violations. The Insurance Division offered comments, the Hawaii Pharmacists Association supported the measure with amendments and suggested future PBM reform funding, and Kaiser Permanente requested a technical amendment. A committee question raised whether the staffing and resource request for implementation was too large for a bill focused only on MAC pricing, and the witness said he would provide more data to the next committee. No final action was shown. Next was SB 2425 SD2 HD1 on health insurance and substance use disorder treatment, requiring insurers to honor written assignments of benefits to SUD providers and prohibiting anti-assignment clauses. Supporters described patients being unable to access treatment because of high out-of-pocket costs and said direct payment would reduce harm for people in recovery. HMSA opposed the bill but said it would begin direct payments to non-participating SUD facilities effective March 27, while continuing to object to the assignment-of-benefits portion because of fraud and balance-billing concerns; the Hawaii Association of Health Plans also opposed. Members questioned HMSA about reimbursement mechanics and why the bill was needed if coverage policies were already changing. Finally, the committee heard SB 3045 SD1 HD1, which would require coverage of continuous glucose monitors and related supplies, including for Medicaid managed care, under certain conditions. DHS and the Insurance Division offered comments, while SHPDA, Hilo Benioff Medical Center Foundation, and others supported the bill, citing inconsistent access and a case in which a woman allegedly died after being denied a CGM. HMSA said it already covers medically necessary CGMs and had updated its policy in 2025 for type 1 and insulin-dependent patients, but it raised concerns about expanding mandated coverage to type 2 and gestational diabetes and about supply impacts. The committee also discussed whether the bill duplicated existing coverage standards and why it had been introduced repeatedly. No votes or final dispositions were included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• written testimony with comments. written testimony with comments.
• <00:36:24.640> and Um, we also had written testimony and Um, we also had written testimony
• Um, we are very much written testimony.
• <00:42:10.800> Opportunity testimony in support from Opportunity testimony in support from
• 35.280> Hawaii<01:00:35.599> Youth uh testimony of the Hawaii Youth uh testimony of the

Bills: HB2116, HB1879, HB2214, HB2310, HB2168, HB2427, HB2560, HB1596, HB2197, HB2498, HB2167

Keywords: grants, community engagement, nonprofit organizations, federal assistance, volunteering, youth transit, public transportation, subsidized transit, environment, energy independence, affordable transportation, Hawaii, diaper tax credit, families, low-income, childcare, health, Hawaii Department of Human Services, DHS, emergency appropriation

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures related to human services, homelessness, transit, and family supports. HB 2116 HD1, concerning grants from the Office of Community Services to nonprofits providing training and volunteerism opportunities, drew strong support from Catholic Charities Hawaii, Hawaii Children’s Action Network Speaks, and multiple organizations in written testimony. Supporters said the bill would help vulnerable people affected by federal program changes and cuts by connecting them to reintegration and support services. HB 1879 HD1, establishing a subsidized youth transit program coordinated with counties, received extensive testimony in support from the Department of Health, Department of Taxation, Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, Aloha United Way, Hawaii Bicycling League, Hawaii Appleseed, Hawaii State Youth Commission, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Greenpeace Hawaii, Hawaii Youth Transportation Council, and others. Testifiers emphasized equity, school attendance, reduced transportation costs, climate benefits, and broader access for youth. Several witnesses urged amendments to make the program universal rather than means-tested, and committee discussion noted implementation questions for neighbor islands and rural areas. HB 2214, creating a refundable diaper tax credit for low-income families with children age four and under, was supported by the Hawaii Diaper Bank, Hawaii Children’s Action Network Speaks, and several other organizations. The Department of Taxation recommended making the credit non-refundable and clarifying definitions to aid administration, while supporters argued refundability was important for low-income families who may owe little or no income tax. HB 2310, an emergency appropriation to replenish DHS funds used to provide SNAP benefits during a federal shutdown, also drew broad support from DHS, Catholic Charities, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Children’s Action Network Speaks, Hawaii Food Industry Association, Aloha United Way, and others; witnesses praised the state’s rapid response and said the appropriation would prepare DHS for future emergencies. The committee also heard HB 2168 HD1 and HB 2427 HD1 on education for students experiencing homelessness and unaccompanied homeless youth; the Attorney General recommended technical amendments to avoid conflicts with existing law and to clarify McKinney-Vento-related definitions, while advocates stressed the need for school access, transportation, meals, and other supports for homeless and runaway youth.

Transcript Highlights:

• testimony, providing comment. Okay. testimony, providing comment. Okay.
• on our testimony in support. on our testimony in support.
• their testimony under subsection D. their testimony under subsection D.
• written testimony. Thank you. written testimony. Thank you.
• your testimony. your testimony.

Bills: SB3179, SB2872, SB2391, SB3282, SB2836, SB2181

Keywords: educational workers, harassment, workplace safety, temporary restraining orders, investigation procedures, retired education employees, teacher shortage, rehired retirants, entry level salary, collective bargaining agreements, pension benefits, education, teacher salaries, automatic increments, collective bargaining, teacher retention, workforce development, Pell grant program, short-term education, eligibility

Summary: The joint committee first heard SB 3179, which would require the Department of Education and charter schools to report harassment incidents involving educational workers and adopt procedures for handling them. DOE supported the bill, while the Attorney General recommended clarifying amendments to limit the measure to harassment directed at workers because of their position, to limit DOE legal assistance to temporary restraining order actions, and to clarify whether the harassment must come from outside the school system. Members also discussed whether the bill should cover non-DOE individuals on campus, whether investigations could be handled in-house, and whether training should be embedded in existing workday or school-year training rather than added as a separate requirement. The committee later voted to pass the bill with amendments as SD1. The committee then took up SB 2872, which would require retired teachers or administrators rehired into shortage or hard-to-fill positions to be paid the entry-level salary for that position. DOE supported the bill, and the Attorney General requested clarifying language about its effective date and that it would not affect already matured rights and duties. The Employees’ Retirement System administration emphasized that the bill should retain a 12-month break in service to preserve the pension system’s tax-exempt status and noted the importance of consistent classification of eligible positions. Members expressed support for using retired educators to help fill staffing gaps, but no final action was taken in the portion provided. The committee also heard SB 2391, which would provide annual step increases for public school teachers under bargaining unit 5, subject to funding. The Attorney General said the bill could conflict with collective bargaining procedures and Chapter 89, while DOE said unit 5 includes more than teachers and asked that the benefit be considered for other bargaining units as well, with funding provided if enacted. HSTA strongly supported the measure, arguing that annual step movement is already recognized in the collective bargaining agreement as a recruiting and retention tool. Testimony totals were noted as 16 in support, two in opposition, and three comments. Finally, the committee heard SB 3282, which would establish a statewide framework for the federal workforce Pell Grant program to fund short-term workforce education and training. The Attorney General suggested clarifying that the matter is one of statewide concern because UH is involved. UH and the Chamber of Commerce supported the bill, and DLIR testified that it is coordinating with DOE, the Workforce Development Council, and national groups on implementation. Members questioned whether the Workforce Development Council or DLIR should handle rulemaking and administration, and DLIR said the council is advisory while the department has grant administration expertise. The committee then moved into decision-making after discussion of possible amendments and implementation concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:20:51.600> okay present okay need c by testimony okay present okay need c by testimony
• yes I I stand by the written testimony yes I I stand by the written testimony<00:21:08.720> but
• Here are copies of our testimony.
• For SB 1443, we had no testimony on this. Sorry, no late testimony.
• :47:16.520> testimony<00:47:17.520> I sorry testimony no late testimony I sorry testimony

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a long calendar of health-related measures, beginning with SB 297, a proposed constitutional amendment to protect reproductive freedom. Supporters included medical, labor, and advocacy groups, while opponents, including Hawaii Family Forum and Hawaii Christian Coalition, argued the term “reproductive freedom” was too vague and could be misunderstood. Testimony on SB 350, a similar constitutional amendment protecting contraception, also drew strong support from medical and advocacy groups and opposition from religious organizations; one witness said the measure was especially important to protect reproductive care and contraception. Several bills focused on health system administration and public health. SB 1438 on home care agencies, SB 1439 on nuisances, SB 1441 on transferring the AAHU regional health care system to the Department of Health, SB 1442 on children’s mental health services, SB 1443 on the Department of Health, SB 1444 on general excise tax, and SB 1445 on youth mental health all received mostly supportive testimony from state agencies and community organizations. On SB 1445, the Hawaii State LGBTQ Commission asked that LGBTQI+ and Native Hawaiian youth be specifically considered in mental health services. SB 1450, creating an intensive mobile team pilot for houseless individuals with serious brain disorders, drew support from state agencies and providers; a street medicine advocate said the pilot could help address sustainability, insurance, and service delivery on the streets. The committee also heard testimony on access and workforce measures, including SB 1596 on nursing, SB 1565 on acupuncture, SB 1564 on Medicaid, SB 1418 for an emergency DHS appropriation, SB 1417 on crimes against protective services workers, SB 1411 on Medicaid third-party liability, SB 1399 on a family resilience pilot program, SB 1398 on trauma-informed care, SB 1281 on telehealth, and SB 1279 on telepharmacy. Most of these measures drew broad support from agencies, provider groups, and advocacy organizations. On SB 1281, HMSA opposed the bill as written, warning about audio-only telehealth and federal rule changes, while other health groups supported it as important for rural, kupuna, and disabled residents. On SB 1417, a Honolulu Police Department captain supported stronger protections for DHS workers but could not provide complaint data and said he would follow up later. The hearing ended with the chair noting quorum and asking whether the committee was ready for decision making; no votes or final actions were recorded in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony here today.
• Thank you for your testimony here today.
• Thank you for your testimony. Absolutely. But okay, thank you for your testimony. Absolutely.
• So if we are going to go through all the written submitted testimony and oral testimony, we are going
• We are going to go through all the written, submitted testimony and oral testimony thoroughly as we make

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health heard testimony on four bills: H. 5013 and S. 2928, which would establish a three-year celiac disease screening pilot program for children during routine cholesterol/lipid screening at ages 8 to 12; H. 5087, regulating medical spas; and H. 5115, establishing statewide food truck regulations, though the transcript focused almost entirely on the celiac and medical spa bills. For the celiac proposal, Rep. Badger and Sen. Lovely described long diagnostic delays, the lack of a cure, and the potential for a simple blood test to identify children earlier and reduce long-term harm. Multiple patients, clinicians, and researchers supported the pilot, saying celiac is frequently missed because symptoms vary widely or are absent, and that early detection could prevent malnutrition, growth problems, osteoporosis, and other complications. Testifiers also emphasized that the bill would study feasibility, accuracy, cost, and acceptability, and would include family education and support resources if diagnoses are made through the program. Several experts and advocates backed the celiac screening pilot, including a pediatric gastroenterologist from Italy who described successful national screening efforts there, a Celiac Disease Foundation representative, pediatric gastroenterologists from Massachusetts and Colorado, a pediatric dietitian, and a parent whose child was diagnosed after severe malnutrition. They argued that routine screening alongside existing pediatric bloodwork could identify many undiagnosed children and improve health equity, since celiac disease is often overlooked in people of color and lower-income patients. Committee members asked about how the screening would work, and witnesses explained it could begin with a blood test, followed by confirmatory endoscopy if needed. No vote was taken in the hearing. On H. 5087, witnesses from the medical aesthetics industry largely opposed the bill as written, saying it was outdated, redundant with existing Massachusetts licensing and board oversight, and too restrictive for nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and other licensed providers. Testifiers, including a retired lobbyist, a nurse practitioner, a PA, a plastic surgeon, and a clinic owner, said the bill could reduce access, raise costs, and push care into less regulated settings, while not addressing the real issues of training, compliance, and patient safety. Committee members pressed for more specific feedback on what provisions were unnecessary or duplicative, and witnesses said they had submitted position papers and written testimony identifying conflicts with current law. The hearing ended with the chair noting that all oral and written testimony would be reviewed before any decisions are made.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, if you check our testimony, there's a testimony from Likelike School of it.
• There seems to be some inconsistency with your written testimony than with your oral testimony.
• So, are you watering down your oral testimony now? Because the written testimony is very clear.
• testimony in support? testimony in support?
• >> The board stands on its testimony, Chair. >> Uh, and your testimony is?

Bills: SB3263, SB3261

Keywords: student-athletes, name image likeness, NIL, compensation, transparency, University of Hawaii, Title IX, funding, protections, athlete agents, student athletes, endorsement contracts, professional representation, registration requirements, sports law, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees heard testimony on Senate Bill 3263, which would create a state-supported endowment for University of Hawaii athletics NIL (name, image, and likeness) funding. University of Hawaii Athletics Director Matt Eliott supported the bill, saying NIL requires both immediate funding and a longer-term sustainable solution. He asked for several changes: lowering the initial endowment target from $10 million to $2 million so the fund could start sooner, allowing NIL reporting by team rather than by individual student-athlete, and clarifying that athletes may choose whether to use an agent, while still allowing certified agents or a parent/guardian if desired. Committee members raised concerns about using taxpayer dollars for athlete compensation, the burden on a small-state budget, and whether the university could realistically raise the required matching funds. Several senators questioned whether the university had a concrete fundraising plan and whether the endowment would meaningfully help UH compete with larger programs. Eliott said UH is already fundraising privately for current NIL obligations, had raised more than $1.6 million toward a $3 million annual goal, and would continue fundraising for both short-term needs and the endowment match. He also said the university is not trying to compete with Power Five schools on the same scale, but to be successful at its own conference level. Members also discussed transparency and privacy, with some senators arguing that if state money is used, the public should know how it is spent, while Eliott said individual student-athlete NIL information should remain private and team-level reporting would be preferable. He confirmed international student-athletes are eligible for NIL and said about 60 to 70 UH athletes are currently participating, with more than 100 expected next year. The discussion also touched on UH’s Mountain West media rights and local TV rights, with Eliott explaining that the conference distribution is expected to remain around $3.5 million and that local TV rights would be negotiated separately. No vote or final action was taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony today. Thank you very much for testimony today.
• Thank you for your testimony. I'm seeing none. Thank you for your testimony. John DeNicola.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you for your testimony. Saranda Jackson. I'm sorry.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you very much for your testimony. Jessica Kedziora.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused heavily on firearms legislation, especially bills to repeal Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2024 (including H. 2618/S. 1671 and related repeal measures) and bills on firearm industry accountability (H. 2672/S. 1653). Supporters of repeal, including Senator Peter Durant, Rep. Ken Sweezey, gun owners, instructors, sportsmen, and women’s gun-rights advocates, argued that Chapter 135 overreaches, creates confusion in licensing and training requirements, burdens lawful gun owners, restricts pepper spray and semi-automatic firearms, and is being enforced in ways they said criminalize responsible conduct. Committee members defending the law said it was the product of years of work, public listening sessions, and multiple drafts, and argued that Massachusetts remains the safest state for gun violence and that implementation issues, such as live-fire training, had been delayed to allow time for regulations and infrastructure. Several witnesses also testified on H. 2672/S. 1653, which would create firearm industry standards of conduct and allow civil actions against manufacturers, distributors, and dealers that engage in unsafe or unlawful practices. Supporters from the Massachusetts Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown, Brady, Giffords, and survivors described the bill as a way to hold the industry accountable, reduce the flow of crime guns, and give victims and the Attorney General a path to sue bad actors. They cited data on crime-gun traces, disproportionate impacts on communities of color, and examples from other states that have enacted similar laws. Opponents, including gun dealers and industry representatives, argued that existing law already punishes illegal sales, that most crime guns are stolen or diverted after lawful sale, and that the bill would improperly target manufacturers for the actions of others. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to remove the non-resident ban on semi-automatic firearms for hunting (H. 2710/S. 1676), with Backcountry Hunters and Anglers supporting the change as a way to restore access for returning residents, veterans, and hunting programs that had been displaced. Later testimony returned to repeal and related gun-law bills, with sportsmen’s groups arguing Chapter 135 was rushed, confusing, and harmful to youth hunting and lawful ownership. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the hearing; it was a public testimony session with extensive questioning by committee members.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. with per DCCA testimony. And we're also with per DCCA testimony.
• further in-person testimony. further in-person testimony.
• has submitted testimony in support. has submitted testimony in support.
• We appreciate your testimony testimony testimony >> and<00:08:18.639> thank<00:08:18.720
• from our testimony.

Bills: SB2363, SB2054, SB2057, SB2377, SB3322

Keywords: public lands, county authority, public health, safety regulations, cultural preservation, public safety, Hawaii National Guard, military deployment, governor authority, federal assistance, immigration enforcement, sanctuary policy, detainer, ICE, federal immigration authorities, 8 U.S.C. 1357(g), 8 U.S.C. 1373, 8 U.S.C. 1644, deportation, undocumented immigrants

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 2033 on renewable energy, focused on rooftop solar and grid-ready homes. Members discussed amendments intended to clarify retrofit provisions for new homes, cost-sharing requirements for interconnecting customers, compliance with relevant safety standards or certifications, and a date change. The chair recommended passage with amendments, and the committee adopted the recommendation unanimously. The joint committees then heard Senate Bill 2363 on county authority over access to encumbered properties such as streams. The City and County of Honolulu, along with the Department of Transportation and the Department of the Prosecuting Attorney, testified in support, saying the bill would help protect public safety, reduce flood risk, and prevent illicit activity. A Libertarian Party representative opposed the measure, arguing the problem stemmed from mismanagement and that the bill granted overly broad new powers. No action was taken during the hearing. The committees also heard Senate Bill 2054 and Senate Bill 2057, both relating to public safety and immigration-related state authority. Testimony on SB 2054 largely supported limiting state resources for federal or out-of-state deployments when the governor objects, with the Hawaii National Guard raising concerns about unclear obligations for service members and the distinction between Title 10 and Title 32 authority. On SB 2057, supporters including ACLU of Hawaii, the Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, and the Legal Clinic said the bill would curb cooperation with ICE, protect constitutional rights, and preserve trust in immigrant communities; one witness also noted the rapid growth of 287(g) agreements nationwide. The committee then moved on to SB 2377 on property damage to critical infrastructure, where Charter Communications and Hawaiian Telecom supported the bill and asked for clarification to include broadband and telecommunications, while the Public Defender questioned whether the higher penalty was justified. Finally, the committee began SB 3322 on law enforcement, with testimony emphasizing clearer separation between local police and federal agents, limits on immigration enforcement cooperation, and protections for community trust; the hearing continued with additional testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• If your oral testimony is different from your written testimony, the time limit for each testifier will
• hear from those offering testimony. hear from those offering testimony.
• uh members have two pieces of testimony. uh members have two pieces of testimony.
• our testimony providing written our testimony providing written comments.<00:30:12.399> I
• We have nobody uh but we have testimony We have nobody uh but we have testimony that's<00:36:40.320

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing covered SB 2120, which would allow certain state and county employees rehired within one year to transfer accrued vacation and sick leave and extend the break-in-service period for health benefits. Testimony was split: the Department of Human Resources explained current leave payout and pension credit rules and raised concerns about the long transfer window, while labor representatives supported the measure. During decision-making, both committees recommended passage with amendments. The amendments narrowed the bill by changing the break-in-service period to 180 days for leave beginning on or after July 1, 2026, making the benefit transfer voluntary with a 90-day notice deadline, and changing the effective date to January 1, 2077. The recommendations were adopted by vote. The committees also heard SB 2523, an appropriation for the City and County of Honolulu Department of Information Technology to modernize the driver’s license and motor vehicle system. DIT described the current COBOL-based mainframe as decades old, said the project would use a code-share arrangement with Arizona, and estimated a $10 million, two-year conversion and rollout. Members questioned the cost, the city-state funding arrangement, and the feasibility of the project, including whether it would move to a cloud-based system. After testimony, both committees deferred the measure. In the Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs portion, SB 2032 on consumer protection for solar sales drew broad support from the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, the Office of Consumer Protection, the Hawaii Solar Energy Association, and others. Testifiers said the bill was needed in response to misleading solar door-to-door sales and urged amendments to clarify “contractual affiliation,” exclude balcony/portable solar devices, and require disclosure of cash and financed prices. The committee then moved on to SB 2079 on vehicle titles, which had one supporter and one opponent but no testimony in person or online, and SB 2241 on zero-emission vehicles, for which the Hawaii State Energy Office submitted written support. The hearing also began discussion of SB 2579 on water-related grants, where agencies said any program would need clearer statutory standards and likely a feasibility study before implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:01:59.040> and stand on our written testimony and stand on our written testimony and support
• We submitted testimony on Wednesday, but it doesn't appear on the testimony link. >> Okay.
• <00:13:42.160> which detailed in my written testimony which detailed in my written testimony
• > a<00:28:27.279> study written testimony requesting a study written testimony requesting
• health care plans various um testimony health care plans various um testimony and<00:42:38.079><

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The HHS committee met in Room 224 and announced the hearing was being streamed live, with a one-minute limit on testimony. The chair explained that written testimony had already been reviewed and that speakers should either add new comments or stand on their written testimony. The committee first heard SB 2211, an emergency appropriation to the Department of Human Services. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support, including DHS, Aloha United Way, the Hawaii Food Industry Association, the Hawaii Public Health Institute, Catholic Charities, and many individuals. Supporters emphasized the importance of maintaining SNAP-related food assistance and emergency food delivery, while Catholic Charities raised a question about whether the bill’s language would also reach food banks serving food-insecure households that are not on SNAP. No opposition was heard and the bill was moved on without questions from members. The committee then heard SB 2025, which would exempt actively practicing advanced practice registered nurses from jury duty. Testimony was broadly supportive from nursing and health organizations, including the Hawaii American Nurses Association, the Hawaii affiliate of the College of Nurse Midwives, the Hawaii State Board of Nursing, and others. One witness from Kaiser Permanente requested an amendment to include physician assistants, and a committee member asked the Board of Nursing to review that request. The bill otherwise drew no opposition and no further member questions. SB 2038, relating to medication labeling, drew the most extended discussion. The measure would change labeling requirements for certain abortion medications, and testimony was split between supporters who framed it as a privacy and access issue and opponents who raised patient safety, ethics, and transparency concerns. The Department of Health supported the intent but requested an amendment to allow quicker access to private information during investigations without a subpoena. The Board of Pharmacy said it supported the written comments but noted operational challenges and possible cost impacts, while Kaiser said compliance would likely require manual workarounds and could slow pharmacy processes. The chair and members questioned whether patients could simply remove labels themselves, but witnesses said there could still be safety and access issues if the patient is not the one receiving the prescription. The committee then moved on to SB 2050, relating to chiropractic, which received support from the Hawaii Board of Chiropractic and the Hawaii State Chiropractic Association, with no substantive opposition noted. The hearing later turned to SB 201, relating to insurance, which appeared to be a new mandated-benefit measure tied to infertility/IVF coverage. The Hawaii Civil Rights Commission provided comments, while Hawaii Family Forum opposed the bill, arguing it went beyond medical infertility and raised ethical and public policy concerns. Kaiser and the Hawaii Association of Health Plans both asked for a study or audit, saying the measure could create new insurance mandates and increase costs for residents and employers. Private Work Hawaii strongly supported the bill as an equity issue. The committee noted there was no quorum for decision-making and deferred action on the measure to a later hearing, then recessed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair opens up public testimony and closes public testimony.
• Chair opens up public testimony and closes public testimony, leaving HB 1562 pending.
• Chair opens public testimony, closes public testimony, and leaves HB 3833 pending.
• We're going to open public testimony, close public testimony, and leave HB 3250 pending.
• Chair opens up public testimony.

Bills: HB146, HB150, HB1500, HB1545, HB1562, HB2067, HB2520, HB2818, HB3214, HB3250, HB3466, HB3512, HB3623, HB4063, HB4395, HB4464, HB4668, HB4690, HB5331, HB3833

Keywords: HB 146, Texas Capitol, State Capitol, State Preservation Board, Congress Avenue, Travis County, traffic lanes, lane closure, road closure, municipal authority, local control, Capitol area, downtown Austin, special events, construction traffic plan, pedestrian safety, public works, transportation policy, government code chapter 443, cybersecurity

Summary: The committee took up several pending business items and reported a series of House bills out of committee, including HB 2467, HB 2468, HB 2518, HB 4310, HB 4386, HB 4490, HB 5323, and HB 149. Most of these were advanced on committee substitute motions and sent to the local and uncontested calendar or reported favorably to the full Senate. HB 2467 drew one nay vote, while the others were approved without opposition. HB 4310 and HB 4386 were described as committee-substitute versions with changes narrowing disclosure requirements and preserving attorney-client privilege in certain circumstances. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 149, an AI governance bill. The substitute was explained as addressing biometric identifier capture and storage, exempting certain AI uses for security and fraud prevention, clarifying definitions, restricting AI systems that simulate explicit child sexual content, adjusting Attorney General investigative authority, refining sandbox program waivers, reducing Texas AI Council powers and membership, and adding DIR coordination provisions. The committee adopted the substitute and reported the bill favorably. The committee then heard extensive testimony on HB 1500, the DIR sunset bill. The author said the bill would continue DIR for 12 years, restructure its board, update advisory committees, require regular cybersecurity assessments and penetration testing for state agencies, improve IT procurement training, and transfer the e-grants program to the Comptroller. A Texas 2036 witness supported the bill as a way to strengthen governance, procurement, and cybersecurity. Members asked detailed questions about the bill’s structure and then left HB 1500 pending. The committee also heard a lengthy presentation on HB 150, which would create the Texas Cyber Command as a component of the University of Texas System, administratively attached to UTSA and located in San Antonio. The author argued the command would centralize cyber threat intelligence, incident response, and digital forensics, and would be able to support state and local entities, with optional services for local governments. Members raised concerns about university mission drift, governance, security, chain of command, procurement authority, gifts and donations, and civil liberties implications of proactive cyber monitoring. Witnesses from UTSA/NSCC and SecurityScorecard testified in support, emphasizing the security of the downtown San Antonio facility, the existing cyber ecosystem there, and the need for a dedicated cyber capability. The bill remained under discussion with no final committee action announced in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you committee for hearing my testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• OK, that the testimony didn't come across that way.
• It's my personal testimony.
• And that is my testimony. Thank you. Thank you so much for your testimony.

Bills: HB 45, HB 755, HB 1232, HB 1555, HB 2460, HB 2702, HB 2973, HB 3120, HB 3225, HB 3314, HB 3356, HB 3371, HB 3634, HB 3638, HB 4247, HB 4283, HB 4290, HB 4302, HB 4503, HB 4511, HB 4565, HB 4581, HB 4627, HB 4632, HB 4660, HB 4668, HB 4960, HB 5042

Keywords: housing, affordable housing, rent control, landlord-tenant laws, housing rights, lobbying, public entities, expenditures, government code, transparency, Texas Ethics Commission, government regulation, lobbying restrictions, government accountability, taxpayer money, HB 1232, whistleblower, whistleblower protection, public employee, retaliation

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have written testimony and also wish to speak, please bring your written testimony forward when
• I have no one ready to provide public testimony, so is there anyone wishing to provide public testimony
• Thanks for the testimony. Obviously, Senator Miles...
• Hearing and seeing none, public testimony is closed.
• Testimony, if you would, Madam Clerk.

Bills: SB2082, SB2203, SB2351, SB2550, SCR48

Keywords: concrete crushing, hospital proximity, environmental regulation, public health, zoning laws, SB 2203, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, TCEQ, State Office of Administrative Hearings, SOAH, contested case, administrative law judge, ALJ, discovery, scope of discovery, certification, administrative procedure, permit dispute, agency rules, Government Code

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony.
• Barish, for your testimony.
• Thanks for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Did you have a question? Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.

Bills: HB4806

Keywords: civil action, damages, health care services, noneconomic damages, negligence, legal standards, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• stand on written testimony.
• I Can I give testimony, Chair? I Can I give testimony, Chair?
• No, they did Did they have testimony? No, they did have<01:01:04.160> testimony.
• have testimony. Who is it from? have testimony. Who is it from?
• . testimony. testimony.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard HB 649, which would create a small boat harbor commercial vessel special fund and raise mortgage fees on commercial vessels to fund harbor improvements. DLNR stood on written testimony in support, while the Ocean Tourism Coalition, Activity and Attractions Association of Hawaii, Calypso Charters, and a local commercial operator all opposed the bill, arguing that the fee increase would burden thin-margin businesses without fixing procurement and staffing problems and that the bill’s fee language and fund allocations were too vague. A DLNR witness also noted a prior bill, HB 2477, had sought to broaden the fee base to more ocean operators statewide rather than increase the percentage. No vote was taken on HB 649 during the portion shown. The committee then heard HB 2599 on aquatic protection, which would prioritize ecosystem integrity and use of best available science in managing aquatic resources and set coral reef resilience goals. DLNR supported the measure, and a testifier from the public urged stronger coral goals for Oahu and a broader framework including water quality, herbivore management, fishery management, enforcement, and coral restoration. There was no opposition or vote shown on HB 2599 before the committee recessed to a joint hearing. In the joint Economic Development and Tourism / Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts hearing, members heard HB 2118 on transferring the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts and the King Kamehameha Celebration Commission from DAGS to DBED, HB 2474 on authorizing non-binding international cooperative agreements, HB 1863 on creating an honorary ambassador to Canada, HB 1943 on out-of-state DBED offices and export promotion, and HB 2604 on a performing arts ticket surcharge. Testimony was generally supportive for HB 2118, HB 2474, HB 1863, and HB 1943, with questions focused on agency placement, sister-state relationships, and the rationale for overseas offices. HB 2604 drew opposition from the Tax Foundation and others, who argued the surcharge functioned as a tax and would make arts participation more expensive; the chair recommended deferring it. During decision-making, both committees passed HB 2118, HB 2474, HB 1863, and HB 1943 with amendments, including technical changes and revised effective dates. For HB 2474, the amendments were described as clarifying definitions for sister-state and international cooperative agreements, allowing relationships with national governments, and preserving legislative approval and transparency. HB 1943 was amended to require an office in Laoag City, Philippines, rather than a non-existent DBED Philippines office. HB 2604 was deferred. After the joint session, the Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts committee resumed and heard HB 2395 on permits for taking marine deposits and HB 2361 on administrative support for the Kahului Bay Regional Council, both of which drew only DLNR written testimony and no further action in the excerpt. The committee then began HB 1823 on Coastal Zone Management Act exemptions, with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs testifying first, but the transcript cuts off before further testimony or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• And if someone asks to see your testimony, you will make that testimony available to any member of the
• The committee appreciates your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony.
• I present this testimony on...
• Thank you very much for your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee first heard testimony on a proposed Massachusetts baby bonds program, including H. 3429, S. 2146, and the Treasurer’s related bill H. 48. Treasurer Goldberg and a broad coalition of advocates, researchers, health professionals, and people with lived experience said the program would create trust accounts for children born into low-income families or in DCF custody, with funds available at age 18 for education, homeownership, business startup, or other long-term asset-building uses. Supporters argued the program would help close the racial wealth gap, improve economic mobility, and not affect eligibility for financial aid or public benefits. Committee members asked about administration, investment returns, eligibility, and withdrawal rules; the Treasurer said the accounts would be held in trust and managed by her office with an advisory board, with funds accessible at 18 and usable through age 35 if the beneficiary remains a Massachusetts resident. No vote was taken during the testimony shown. The committee also heard testimony on legislation establishing Lobular Breast Cancer Awareness Day, including S. 2666 and H. 4625. Senator Ross, Representative Badger, physicians, survivors, and advocates described invasive lobular carcinoma as difficult to detect because it often grows in lines rather than forming a lump, can be missed on mammography, and is underfunded and underrepresented in research and clinical trials. Witnesses said the bill would codify an annual October 15 proclamation to raise awareness, improve diagnosis, and encourage more targeted research and treatment. Committee members asked why the disease is so hard to detect, and medical witnesses explained the imaging challenges and the lack of lobular-specific protocols. The witnesses urged favorable reports. The committee then took testimony on H. 4648, a bill concerning the purchase or lease of Fenn Farm in Stockbridge by the Stockbridge-Munsee community. Representative Davis, the Stockbridge Land Trust president, and the tribal president testified that the bill would remove a conservation restriction tied to a state MVP grant so the tribe could manage the land without a restriction that they said would conflict with tribal sovereignty and Indigenous stewardship practices. They said the parcel is a sacred site connected to Monument Mountain and that the restriction is unnecessary because the land is already surrounded by conserved property. The witnesses asked for favorable action on the bill. Finally, the committee heard testimony on H. 3416, a resolution urging Congress to create a national infrastructure bank. Representative Senna and several advocates argued that an off-budget infrastructure bank could finance major repairs and upgrades to roads, bridges, rail, water systems, broadband, and housing without adding to the state budget, while creating jobs and supporting economic growth. Witnesses cited historical precedents for national infrastructure banks and said Massachusetts could benefit substantially from such a program. The transcript shown does not include a committee vote or final action on the resolution.

Transcript Highlights:

• do so through written testimony.
• Appreciate your testimony.
• Appreciate your testimony.
• Appreciate your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue, chaired by Senator James Eldridge and Representative Adrian Madaro, opened its hearing with a moment of silence for the late Lowell State Senator Ed Kennedy and reviewed hearing procedures and deadlines. The committee then took testimony on several corporate tax bills, including S. 2033/H. 3110 on offshore tax avoidance, H. 3248 on a manufacturing tax exemption, H. 3057 on a tiered corporate minimum tax, and S. 2041 on a corporate tax haven blacklist, along with a separate business interest deduction bill. No votes were taken during the hearing. Supporters of S. 2033/H. 3110, including labor unions, health care workers, educators, public health advocates, seniors, and several legislators, argued that Massachusetts needs new revenue to offset federal cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, health care, education, and other services. They said the bill would raise roughly $400 million annually by increasing the share of offshore profits included in the state tax base from 5% to 50%, and they framed it as a fairness measure that would require large multinational corporations to pay more while leaving most local businesses and workers unaffected. Testimony emphasized risks to MassHealth, PCA services, adult dental care, hospitals, schools, and public health programs if new revenue is not raised. Opponents, including the Mass Taxpayers Foundation and the Council on State Taxation, argued the proposal is poor tax policy and likely unconstitutional because it would tax foreign-source income without allowing foreign tax credits or a comparable apportionment method. They said Massachusetts should take a broader, coordinated approach to federal tax changes rather than a standalone bill, and warned of litigation risk and possible double taxation. Supporters such as MassBudget and former tax counsel Don Griswold countered that the bill is a reasonable rough-justice approach, consistent with federal and neighboring-state treatment, and that it would primarily affect a small number of very large multinationals. On S. 2041, the Global Business Alliance opposed the proposed tax haven blacklist, while supporting a separate bill allowing business interest deductibility.

Transcript Highlights:

• your written testimony to us.
• Hi, thanks for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing covered a broad set of environmental and water-related bills, with much of the testimony focused on blue economy and circular economy proposals, drought management, drinking water safety, flood resilience, and water infrastructure funding. Supporters of bills such as H. 987 and H. 988 described grant programs for blue economy workforce development, research, small businesses, and public education about a circular economy. Other speakers backed measures on coastal erosion research, recreational boating dredging, cranberry water-right transfers, sand mining oversight, and a voucher program for home water filtration in PFAS-impacted communities. Several elected officials and advocates also urged passage of bills to require private well testing, improve school drinking water safety, and address sand mining pollution and PFAS contamination. Water supply and drought issues drew extensive testimony. Senator Eldridge and others supported legislation to let the state, through DEP and the drought management task force, impose regional water-use restrictions during droughts and make the task force permanent in statute. Advocates from watershed groups, farms, and environmental organizations said the current town-by-town approach is inconsistent and ineffective, and they described drought impacts on rivers, farms, private wells, and wildfire risk. A related bill on private wells was supported as a way to help homeowners test and remediate contaminated wells, especially in rural areas without public water. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to allow the Lynnfield Water District to join the MWRA, with local officials saying the move would help address PFAS and other contamination and improve supply reliability. Another major panel supported a water infrastructure funding bill, arguing that aging drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater systems need major new investment, including support for PFAS treatment, sewer rate relief, biosolids research, and regional interconnections. Members asked about costs, funding sources, and the relationship to existing revolving loan funds; witnesses said the bill would need to be paired with future bond funding and new revenue ideas. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs repeatedly invited written testimony and noted the large number of speakers.

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's move on. stands on their testimony. stands on their testimony.
• We'll stand on our testimony. on this. We'll stand on our testimony.
• agriculture to stand on testimony. agriculture to stand on testimony.
• and I support my testimony um testimony and I support my testimony as<01:05:40.480> well<01:05
• We understand that's previous testimony. That's our testimony for the next bill also.

Bills: SB2606, SB3253, SB237, SB3252, SB1178, SB2322, SB2019, SB3043, SB3014, SB2972, SB1190, SB2488

Keywords: wildlife sanctuary, environmental conservation, Hawaii, nonprofit corporation, freshwater preservation, community stewardship, biodiversity, ecological heritage, conservation, endangered species, wildlife preservation, native birds, sanctuary, nonprofit, DLNR, agricultural district, land use, chapter 195D, chapter 205, chapter 42F

Summary: The committees heard testimony on several measures related to wildlife, conservation, shoreline adaptation, and climate governance. On SB 2606, which would establish the Freshwater State Recreational Area Wildlife Sanctuary Corporation, the Department of Land and Natural Resources said it had concerns about employee eligibility and was not yet prepared to comment further on the bill’s ramifications. After testimony ended, a senator asked DLNR to follow up with more detail, and the department said it would relay the questions to leadership and respond later. No vote was taken on the measure during the excerpt. On SB 3253, which would create the Hawaii Conservation Sanctuary as a nonprofit entity to work with DLNR, the department said it supported the bill. In discussion, DLNR said Hawaii has not done anything like this before, described a similar model in New Zealand, and estimated that developing such a sanctuary could cost millions of dollars. Members also discussed whether the concept would fit with existing efforts such as Hakalau, and DLNR said the bill could apply to private or state lands depending on the site. No action was taken. The most extensive discussion was on SB 237, which would expand state and county authority to develop adaptation pathways for relocating infrastructure away from sea level rise and coastal flooding areas. DLNR supported the bill, saying it prioritizes public trust resources over economic development or private property. The Kahana Bay Steering Committee and the Shoreline Preservation Coalition opposed the measure, arguing it was too focused on managed retreat and should include a broader range of shoreline responses, such as erosion mitigation, groins, sand nourishment, and other interim protections. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development said it appreciated the bill’s intent but wanted broader language that would allow more tools in the toolbox. Members debated whether retreat is inevitable, whether different shorelines require different approaches, and whether the bill should be more flexible. No vote was taken. The final measure discussed was SB 3252, which would amend the powers and duties of the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, create a coordinator position, and appropriate funds. The commission’s coordinator testified in support, while OPSD opposed the bill, saying it would remove the two cabinet-level co-chair positions, raise accountability concerns, and duplicate some of OPSD’s functions. In questioning, members debated whether the current commission structure has been effective, who would appoint or confirm the coordinator, and whether the bill would improve transparency and implementation. OPSD said it supported more statewide interdepartmental funding for climate planning and staffing, but had concerns about the proposed governance changes. No vote or final action was taken in the excerpt.