Transcript Highlights:

• Answer your name and support or opposition. In support.
• We support this measure.
• We have testimony and support from Emua Alliance, support from the Libertarian Party of Hawaii, support
• from Reborn Maui, support from Legal Clinic, support from Unite Here Local 5 in Hawaii, support from
• , support legal clinic, support Maui, support legal clinic, support Unite<00:45:57.680><c> here</c><00

Bills: SB3240

Committee: House Public Safety

Keywords: defense, workforce development, local business, manufacturing, federal funding, economic resilience, 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several public safety-related measures and indicated at the outset that, because of short notice, the bills would likely be deferred to the later decision-making agenda. On SB 2645 relating to fire prevention, the bill would restructure the process for selecting the State Fire Marshal and make related changes to the Office of the State Fire Marshal. The Governor’s office, the State Fire Marshal’s office, the Hawaii State Fire Council, DLNR, Maui Fire Department, AIA Hawaii State Council, and others testified, with DLNR supporting most of the bill but opposing the provision changing the marshal’s nomination process to a governor appointee. In questions, members reviewed the relationship between the State Fire Council, the commission, and the marshal, and the Governor’s office clarified that it supported the overall intent but wanted the commission to remain the sole appointing entity. The bill was not voted on in the hearing. The committee then heard SB 3083 relating to protective orders, with support from the U.S. Defense State Liaison Office, the judiciary, the Hawaii National Guard, the Military and Community Relations Office, DBED, and the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Members focused on whether the draft reflected language worked out with the judiciary and whether the bill addressed a previously identified gap in implementation. The Military and Community Relations Office said it had worked with the judiciary on amendments and wanted to ensure the statute created a collaborative process with installation partners and law enforcement. The witness also said the draft appeared to reflect the agreed language, though he noted there were multiple bills moving and that technical amendments might still be needed. No action was taken during the hearing. SB 608 relating to veterans’ rights and benefits drew both support and opposition. Support came from the Hawaii Office of Veterans Services, Veterans Benefits Guide, Aloha Independent Living Hawaii, and individual veterans and service members, who argued the bill would improve access to claims assistance and provide choice and faster help for veterans. Opposition came from the VFW Department of Hawaii and the Veterans Caucus of the Democratic Party of Hawaii, which argued the bill should be amended to align with federal law, especially on accreditation and fee caps. Testimony and questioning centered on whether third-party claims assistance should be regulated, whether fee caps are preempted by federal law, and whether there was evidence of fraud tied to non-accredited representatives. Supporters said the bill would help veterans navigate a slow system, while opponents said accredited representatives are accountable and that the bill should be narrowed. The committee also heard SB 2054 relating to public safety, which would prohibit the Hawaii National Guard from deploying to assist federal troops, federal law enforcement, or other states’ National Guard units in Hawaii when the governor objects. The Hawaii National Guard opposed the bill, while the ACLU of Hawaii, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and numerous other organizations and individuals supported it, arguing it would protect civil liberties and prevent federal overreach. The hearing ended without a vote or final action on these measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• We want to support House Bill 1624.
• We are in support of this legislation.
• The next person in support. Mr.
• I'm here to support bill number 1624.
• She asked for the body's support.

Committee: House Conservation and Natural Resources

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here in strong support of AB 1592.
• What it does seek is to shore up support.
• Cynthia Cortez, with the Delta, in support, also showing support for Sierra Club.
• Happy to be able to support this bill today.
• Michael Chen with Audubon California, in support.

Committees: House Water, Parks and Wildlife , House Water, Parks, and Wildlife

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• support. to speak.
• We also support the bill.
• We are in support of HB 114.
• We are in full support and ask for your support for the health councils.
• room in support.

Committee: House House Health & Human Services

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I would support this tax, and I'm testifying in strong support of SB 6346.
• It will fall on the very program that supporters of this bill are trying to support. Thank you.
• We strongly support this bill.
• I strongly support SB 6346.
• I strongly support SB 6346.

Committee: House Finance

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Jennifer Webb, Sierra Club, waving in support. John Lutzao, waving in support.
• Waving in support. Michaela Moreno, Econcrete, is that right? Waving in support, welcome.
• Linda English, waving in support. Christina Torres? Linda English, waving in support.
• So we have Gail Hankinson waving in support. Yes. We have Gail Hankinson, waving in support.
• We have Joseph Pinder, waving in support. We have Jessica Finch, waving in support.

Bills: S0302 , S0394 , S0480 , S0546 , S0636 , S0774 , S0796 , S1028 , S1050 , S1066 , S1120 , S1230 , S1288 , S1682

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government

Keywords: cybersecurity, information technology, data management, local government compliance, cloud services, state agency oversight, integrated governance, conservation lands, land exchange, state-owned land, Acquisition and Restoration Council, Florida water management, environmental protection, beach management, beach erosion, beach nourishment, coastal resilience, shoreline protection, critical erosion, critically eroded beach

Transcript Highlights:

• But we must continue to be focused on providing support for our students.
• Of this total, $2.6 billion will be allocated to support Cal Grant.
• 100% support. Thank you.
• Support. Again, Aman Singh with the Department of Finance.
• We would support a reduction in the units needed to receive financial aid in order to support our most

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So for those reasons, I support the budget. Support a 2002 budget. Thank you.
• So for those reasons, I support the budget, support a 2002 budget. Thank you.
• And so I am with full support, supporting this measure, supporting this bill, so that we can start making
• I can't support this bill.
• But I certainly support it. I support the entirety of the bill.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Also in support, Amy Z for U Alliance and support Michael Goru Senior in support, Dar Harlin in support
• Also in support, Amy Z for U Alliance and support Michael Goru Senior in support, Dar Harlin in support
• Also in support, Amy Z for U Alliance and support Michael Goru Senior in support, Dar Harlin in support
• Also in support, Amy Z for U Alliance and support Michael Goru Senior in support, Dar Harlin in support
• ><c> in</c><00:16:02.279><c> support</c> support Michael goru senior in support support Michael goru

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on several bills. SB 335 would route objections by political party officers to candidate nomination papers through the Office of Elections. The State Election Director testified that his office was not the right venue for party-membership challenges because it could create conflicts and force the Attorney General to represent the chief election officer in court; members discussed whether all objections should instead go directly to Circuit Court, but no action was taken. SB 280 would expand first-degree negligent injury to cover injuries negligently caused by intoxicated drivers. The Public Defender opposed the bill as too harsh and urged either a lower penalty or clearer statutory definitions of “under the influence,” while the Prosecuting Attorney supported it as a needed increase in accountability for drunk drivers who actually injure someone. Committee members raised concerns about overlap with existing offenses, proportionality, and whether the change would increase jury-trial volume; the prosecutor responded that the bill would apply to a smaller subset of cases involving actual injury and would help ensure more serious treatment of those cases. The committee also heard SB 292, establishing Safe Harbor protections for survivors of sexual exploitation who seek medical or law enforcement assistance, with testimony in support from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, HPD, U Alliance, and others, and no opposition. SB 31, concerning an additional penalty for dog owners whose dogs destroy property on agricultural land, drew only supportive testimony. SB 356 would require restitution in the form of financial support to the minor children of victims killed or disabled by an intoxicated driver; the Public Defender opposed it as better suited to civil court and questioned enforcement after probation, while the Prosecuting Attorney supported it and said courts can issue enforceable restitution orders. Testimony also strongly supported SB 1284, a proposed constitutional amendment prohibiting discrimination based on ethnicity, age, disability, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy, and pregnancy outcomes, with supporters arguing it would strengthen protections in response to current political conditions. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have witnesses in support of SB 943? Good morning.
• Stephanie Jimenez on behalf of Valerre in support. Thank you.
• Anyone wishing to testify in support of SB 964?
• Any individuals wishing to testify in support of SB 1047?
• Any individuals wishing to testify in support of SB 1140?

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The Senate Committee on Appropriations met for its first hearing under the new chair and heard opening remarks emphasizing California’s ongoing fiscal challenges, budget uncertainty, and the need to balance policy goals with stewardship of public funds. The Department of Finance said it had no specific positions on the agenda bills, but noted broader risks to state revenues, including stock market volatility, high-income earnings declines, geopolitical instability, and projected out-year shortfalls where spending growth exceeds revenue growth. The committee then took up 26 suspense-file candidates, with authors waiving presentation on each measure and public testimony limited to fiscal issues. Most bills received no support or opposition testimony and no questions from members. A few witnesses testified in support of SB 1240, SB 943, SB 1056, and others; one witness on SB 948 raised concerns that the bill could increase court costs and pressure the General Fund because out-of-state firearm owners might unknowingly miss a new certification requirement. With no objections on any item, each bill was moved to the suspense file, including SB 881, SB 1240, SB 886, SB 1006, SB 891, SB 920, SB 937, SB 943, SB 1009, SB 944, SB 946, SB 948, SB 959, SB 1056, SB 964, SB 1132, SB 1241, SB 987, SB 1049, SB 1044, SB 1047, SB 1053, SB 1054, SB 1108, SB 1140, and SB 1198. The committee recessed briefly to establish attendance and then adjourned after completing the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• Why do you want us to support H. 228?
• I'm here to support Bill H. 2240. My name is Bill Bernerberg. I don't know. Support Bill H. 2240.
• A lot of the people that we support as a peer support community in Western Massachusetts are people who
• I encourage you to read that, so we definitely encourage you to support this bill... ...support this
• By the way, I'm a peer supporter and was working in a peer supporter role.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Mental Health, Substance Use and Recovery

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on a broad set of mental health, substance use, recovery, and patients’ rights bills. Early testimony focused on H. 2227, which would replace stigmatizing substance use terminology in the General Laws, and H. 3950, which would support parents in recovery involved with DCF by requiring more individualized recovery plans, clearer benchmarks for parenting time, access to recovery coaches or counselors, family counseling after sustained recovery, and staff training on addiction and lived experience. Speakers described the bills as ways to reduce stigma, increase accountability, and improve reunification outcomes for families. A major portion of the hearing centered on S. 1386, which would transfer Bridgewater State Hospital from the Department of Correction to the Department of Mental Health. Advocates, family members, and disability groups testified that Bridgewater functions like a prison rather than a hospital, with excessive restraint, seclusion, involuntary medication, poor conditions, and racial disparities, and argued DMH should oversee a treatment setting. One DMH occupational therapist and MNA member opposed the transfer, saying the real issue is mixing forensic and continuing-care patients and that DMH should instead create designated forensic units under bills H. 228/S. 1408. Committee members asked about Bridgewater’s population, the history of DOC control, capacity, staffing, and how a transfer might be implemented. The committee also heard testimony on modernizing the six fundamental rights for psychiatric inpatients, including expanding communication options, clarifying visitation and advocacy definitions, and improving access to gender-appropriate and culturally relevant items. Another bill, H. 2216, would require stronger oversight before antipsychotic medication is prescribed in nursing homes, prompted by concerns about inappropriate use. Finally, testimony supported H. 2240 and H. 2239 on sober homes, with supporters saying discharge and relocation policies are needed when a resident returns to active use or becomes unsafe, while preserving the recovery environment and resident rights. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> credit program would fund supportive credit program would fund supportive housing<00:02:47.120><
• Right now, supportive housing operators are struggling to create or operate supportive housing because
• </c> housing includes supportive services. housing includes supportive services.
• </c> thus saving critical supportive homes. thus saving critical supportive homes.
• </c><00:09:46.240><c> Case</c> plus supportive services. Case plus supportive services.

Bills: HF2740 , HF2901 , HF4443 , HF3943

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Keywords: affordable housing, housing finance, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, MHFA, low-income housing tax credit, LIHTC, Section 42, compliance period, housing stability, rental housing, affordable rental housing, homelessness, housing insecurity, housing supply, preservation, recapitalization, distressed properties, regulatory relief, local affordable housing aid, Interagency Council to End Homelessness

Transcript Highlights:

• This is support, support. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.
• This bill is a support, support, for a district bill, AB 830.
• Speaker, I rise in support of AB 486.
• I will be supporting AB 572 today.
• I rise in support of this measure.

Summary: The Assembly convened with a quorum call, prayer, and Pledge of Allegiance, then moved through a long daily file of bills. Early procedural motions included a failed attempt to suspend the rules for AB 1219, followed by consideration of numerous measures on housing, veterans, education, elections, energy, wildfire prevention, public safety, and consumer affordability. Several bills drew bipartisan support and passed overwhelmingly, including AB 878 on safety accommodations for survivors of violence, AB 948 on school district facility maintenance, AB 81 and AB 88 on veterans’ mental health and student aid, AB 640 on school board fiscal training, AB 660 on housing permit timelines, AB 1048 on workers’ compensation billing disputes, AB 1119 on dual credentialing, AB 1172 on inhalable anti-seizure medication access, AB 1227 on wildfire prevention, AB 1285 and AB 696 on lithium-ion battery safety, AB 1417 on offshore wind transparency, AB 1530 on disaster recovery assistance, and AB 353 on affordable home internet. Some measures drew opposition or more divided votes, including AB 704 on sealing certain misdemeanor records, AB 1249 on early voting access, AB 1280 on thermal energy incentives, AB 1448 on offshore oil protections, AB 380 on price gouging, AB 402 on Cal Grant increases, AB 1074 on CalWORKs reunification, and AB 1084 on expedited gender-change and name-change court orders. The Assembly also granted reconsideration on AB 435, a child passenger safety bill, and passed it after debate on the five-step safety-seat standard. The floor debate featured recurring themes of affordability, housing, wildfire preparedness, election access, veterans’ services, and public safety. Supporters of the election bill AB 1249 argued it would simply add a Saturday early-voting option in non-VCA counties, while opponents raised concerns about verification and county staffing. AB 30, authorizing E15 gasoline in California, was presented as an urgency measure to lower fuel costs and passed unanimously on the urgency and the bill. AB 1466 on groundwater disputes was also taken up, with the author arguing it would reduce frivolous litigation and better represent all water users; the vote was 42 ayes and 17 noes. After completing the file, the Assembly recessed for lunch, later returned, and continued with additional file items, with many measures passing on strong bipartisan votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our first testifier is HPHA in support, Hawaii Civil Rights Commission in support, and Frank Schultz
• Title Guarantee Hawaiian... support, Save Medicaid Hawaiian... support, Maui Chamber of Commerce in support
• Hawaii Community Foundation and support. AARP Hawaii in support.
• Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks in support. Haluma Collaborative in support.
• Hawaii's Future in support. Hawaii State Association of Counties in support.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint Housing and Public Safety/Water and Land hearing first took up HB 1096, which would repeal statutory tenant-selection preferences for disabled veterans and spouses of deceased veterans in state low-income housing. HPHA testified in support, saying the change was a housekeeping measure because the same preferences already exist in administrative rules and could be adjusted later to align with other local preferences, while also noting the federal VASH program provides stronger veteran housing support. Several members questioned why the preference should be removed at all, emphasizing that veterans have long been underserved and asking for a stronger justification; the committees ultimately deferred HB 1096. The later Housing/Hawaiian Affairs agenda heard HB 606 HD1, a measure to extend Act 279 funding and related exemptions for the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. Supporters argued the bill would give DHHL more time to use the $600 million appropriation to acquire land, work with developers, and address a wait list of about 29,000 applicants, while also helping restore Hawaiian communities and reduce the Hawaiian diaspora. Opponents focused on accountability and oversight, saying DHHL needs clearer plans, measurable goals, and stronger safeguards before receiving more money, and warning that prior spending and strategic-plan changes had reduced the number of applicants served. The committee also heard testimony that the bill would help DHHL fulfill long-standing obligations to Native Hawaiians and that the housing need affects the broader state, not only Hawaiian Home Lands beneficiaries.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are grateful for the support of the 88th.
• state support would need to be funded by tuition.
• We are grateful for your support.
• We're also requesting support of two facility projects to support our technical program expansions.
• This is due in large part to your continued support of LIT that support resulted in further of our tuition

Committee: House Appropriations - S/C on Article III

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We support this bill.
• We support this bill.
• So I support this bill.
• I support this bill.
• :13:00.280><c> support</c> Communications access board support Communications access board support thank

Committee: House Human Services & Homelessness

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Human Services and Homelessness heard two SNAP-related bills on March 13, 2025. SB 960 SD1 would appropriate funds to DHS to improve SNAP administration, including additional positions. Testimony from Catholic Charities Hawaii, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Food Industry Association, AARP Hawaii, Hawaii Appleseed, and many others strongly supported the measure, emphasizing high food insecurity, the importance of SNAP federal dollars, and the need to reduce delays and improve access. DHS said vacancies and retention are the main barriers, with staffing shortages statewide across processing centers. The department described efforts such as wikiwiki hiring, bringing back retired workers, using interns, and improving call center efficiency, and said it had requested a 5% performance incentive package estimated at about $1.1 million per year, though that request did not make the governor’s budget. Members asked about vacancy counts, staffing distribution, and how the bill would interact with other SNAP funding; DHS said some funding was tied to the new eligibility system and that staffing requests would need to be separate. The committee did not take final action on the bill in the portion heard. The committee then heard SB 961 SD1, which would require DHS to adjust minimum certification periods and participate in the Elderly Simplified Application Project. Supporters, including AARP Hawaii, Catholic Charities Hawaii, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Appleseed, Hawaii Food Industry Association, and additional organizations and individuals, said the bill would reduce red tape, help kūpuna, and ease administrative burden. DHS supported the concept but said the current legacy system cannot automate these changes and that any implementation would require manual processing until the new system is in place. DHS and committee members discussed the risk of higher error rates and timeliness problems with manual processing, noting the department had recently been assessed a $1 million penalty for high payment error rates and was already in corrective action for timeliness. Members also discussed the anticipated fall 2026 rollout of the new system and whether the bill should be delayed until then; DHS said it preferred to assess the new system first before pursuing waivers and related changes. The committee then moved on to the next measure after the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• ELIZABETH IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. ELIZABETH AUDUBON FLORIDA AND SUPPORT.
• SAMANTHA, THE CLIO INSTITUTE WAIVING IN SUPPORT. JPL FLORIDA ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT.
• ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS WAIVING IN SUPPORT. SPACE X, WAIVING IN SUPPORT.
• CAROL BOWEN, SYNTHETIC TURF, WAIVING IN SUPPORT. CHRIS DAWSON. WAIVING IN SUPPORT. ANYBODY ELSE?
• WAIVING IN SUPPORT.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . support. support.
• Testimony and support from here for hope. Testimony and support from ARP Hawaii.
• Uh, testimony and support from Alice Abella, testimony and support from Terry Savay, Naa, support from
• Terry Yoshinaga, support from Brett Kulbus, support from Jacqueline Beckman, and support from Nancy
• , support from support from Brett Kulbus, support from Jacqueline<01:35:02.639><c> Beckman,</c><01:35

Bills: HB1769

Committee: House Public Safety

Keywords: criminal justice reform, rehabilitation, private prisons, racial equity, Native Hawaiians, community well-being, mass incarceration, 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 1769, which would require the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to incrementally reduce the number of people incarcerated in private out-of-state correctional institutions. The DCR director opposed the bill, saying the department does not control overall prison population levels because courts determine admissions, and arguing that Hawaiʻi’s in-state facilities are already over capacity, especially Halawa, which he said is 165% over design capacity. He said only a small portion of the population is under departmental control through furlough programs and argued that bringing people home would require building a new medium-security prison. Supporters, including the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, the Public Defender’s office, and several individuals, argued the bill creates a phased, accountable path to reduce reliance on mainland prisons and bring people home. Supporters emphasized the harms of separating incarcerated people from ʻohana and culture, the disproportionate impact on Native Hawaiians, and the need for diversion, treatment, re-entry support, and fair sentencing. Several testifiers also said the department has more control than it claimed, pointing to underused furlough options, reclassification, and empty beds at some in-state facilities, while others urged clearer statutory language and guardrails. Members questioned the director about whether people could be reclassified or moved to available beds at facilities such as Kulani and Waiawa, and about whether the department could do more through staffing and contract changes. The director said some proposals had been sent to the Department of Human Resource Development, but that major facility changes would be costly and that minimum-security facilities would need substantial upgrades to house medium-security inmates. After discussion, the chair said the committee would defer HB 1769 to Wednesday, February 18, 2026, at 11:30 a.m. for decision-making and adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So yes, I will be supporting this.
• We support. Thank you.
• Maya Howard on behalf of Smart Justice California, in support. Justice California, in support.
• Pierre, IBEW 465, and strong support.
• Keith Hutchson, IBEW, Strong support. Keith Ocheson, IBEW 1245, strong support.

Summary: The committee first heard SB 907, which would strengthen California DUI laws in several ways, including mandatory Watson advisements when DUI charges are reduced, judicial discretion for consecutive sentences in cases with multiple victims, enhancements for repeat felony DUI offenders and certain hit-and-run cases, and adding vehicular manslaughter offenses to the violent felony list. The author and supporters, including prosecutors, law enforcement, and victims’ family members, described the bill as a response to repeated, preventable tragedies and argued it would close loopholes and increase accountability. Opponents, including criminal defense and civil liberties groups, raised concerns about duplicative penalties, legal overreach, and the violent-felony and sentencing provisions. Committee members were divided but generally supportive of stronger DUI enforcement; the bill was moved out on a do-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations, with the three-strikes provision removed and the bill kept on call. The committee then heard SB 1015, aimed at online child exploitation and extortion networks. The bill would create a new offense for adults who recruit, direct, coerce, or use minors to harm or exploit other children, and it would also allow limited misdemeanor or felony charges for minors engaged in extreme coercive conduct, with diversion available for juveniles. Supporters, including sheriffs, district attorneys, and child-safety advocates, said the bill addresses a fast-growing cybercrime problem involving grooming, blackmail, self-harm, and organized online groups using minors as intermediaries. Opponents argued existing laws already cover much of the conduct and warned against criminalizing adolescent behavior, urging the Legislature instead to focus on platform accountability. The committee nevertheless advanced the bill on a do-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations, with members emphasizing the need to address evolving online harms. The committee also heard SB 1285, which would clarify that juvenile court dismissals under Welfare and Institutions Code section 782 remain a broad “general dismissal” remedy, separate from record sealing, so that eligible youth can more fully avoid future collateral consequences. Supporters said the bill would restore the intended effect of prior juvenile justice reforms and help young people access employment, education, military service, and licensure without lingering barriers. There was no opposition after one group withdrew its objection, and the bill was moved to the floor on a do-pass motion. SB 1342 followed, a technical cleanup measure for automatic record clearance laws that would prevent outdated pending charges from blocking relief, require local court records to match DOJ updates, and create a way for people to obtain written proof of clearance; it also advanced to Appropriations. Finally, SB 1330 was heard to extend existing assault-and-battery protections for certain workers to utility workers; supporters described rising assaults and even shootings against crews, while one utility worker opposed the bill as only increasing penalties after the fact rather than preventing attacks. The bill was moved out on a do-pass motion and left on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• We support HB 976.
• We have SAG in support.
• We're in strong support of this, and also note that we support the amendments suggested by...
• We have MPA in support. We have Island Film Group in support. Oh, actually, they're in Zoom.
• We have the Local Food Coalition in support. ADC in support.

Committee: House Economic Development & Technology

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Economic Development and Technology heard testimony on HB 976, a measure related to incentives for renewable fuels, including renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel. Supporters said the bill would help close the cost gap between renewable and conventional fuels, strengthen Hawaii’s energy security, support climate goals, and encourage local economic development. Testifiers from Pono Pacific, PAR Hawaii, Hawaiian Electric, Hawaiian Airlines/Alaska Airlines, the Hawaii Department of Transportation, Pacific Biodiesel, Aloha Carbon, and others described ongoing or planned projects, local feedstock development, and potential benefits for agriculture, waste diversion, and emissions reductions. Several testifiers also discussed proposed amendments. The Hawaii Renewable Fuels Coalition said it wanted to remove the import tax credit, eliminate the aggregate cap increase to avoid additional state funding, and revise local-production language to rely on a carbon-intensity threshold rather than location-based preferences. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii raised technical concerns about the bill’s administration, including prorating credits if the cap is exceeded and the feasibility of a 30-day filing window. Some supporters urged keeping solid waste, including construction and demolition debris, as eligible feedstock, while Energy Justice Network opposed that approach and also urged removing GMO-related language and waste-based feedstocks because of environmental and toxic emissions concerns. Opposition testimony focused on the bill’s cost and feasibility. Energy Justice Network and Ted Metros argued the measure could become a large subsidy for a refinery and questioned whether Hawaii has enough land and water to produce meaningful quantities of biofuel locally. Metros also criticized the refundable credit structure and said the state should not bear the cost for what he described as a benefit largely tied to tourism and imported fuel. No vote was taken during the portion of the hearing provided; the chair later noted the committee had received 13 testimonies in support, 18 in opposition, and seven comments, and then invited further discussion on cost allocation and lowering caps to broaden participation.