Transcript Highlights:

• You heard that same testimony today from the DNR.
• You heard that same testimony today from the DNR.
• You heard that same testimony today from the DNR.
• <01:30:19.440> so pheasants forever with the DNR so pheasants forever with the DNR so there's
• <01:43:16.520> estimated activity now as I said DNR estimated activity now as I said DNR estimated

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:36.000> offices these assets also include DNR offices these assets also include DNR
• 11.840> disciplines<00:20:12.320> to across DNR programs and disciplines to across DNR
• Obviously, um DNR public safety needs.
• very important programs that allow DNR very important programs that allow DNR to<00:30:10.480>
• DNR has its home recreation facilities.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• working group within DNR. working group within DNR.
• the intermediate court found that DNR the intermediate court found that DNR SHPD<00:18:29.440>
• Um, Steven Domingo with DNR Land Division.
• >> Um Steven Domingo with DNR land >> Um Steven Domingo with DNR land division.<01:01:26.400
• >> DNR. >> Okay. All right.

Bills: SB2603, SB2083, SB2341, SB2306, SB2782, SB2756, SB2161, SB2477

Keywords: Hawaii Symphony Orchestra, state funding, public performances, educational programs, cultural arts funding, historic properties, preservation, inheritance, working group, public-private partnerships, sustainable funding, historic preservation, Hawaii Revised Statutes, construction, state review, burial sites, cultural artifacts, development review, phased review, administrative fees

Summary: The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 2603, which would designate the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra as the state orchestra of Hawaii. Testimony was uniformly supportive from the Attorney General’s office, the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, Retail Merchants of Hawaii, Hawaii Youth Symphony, the Hawaii Symphony Orchestra, the Hawaiian Steel Guitar Association, and others. Supporters emphasized the bill’s value to arts education, cultural vitality, and the visitor economy. The chair noted there were also many written testimonies submitted, and the bill was left without questions or action in the excerpt. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2083, which would create a state-owned historic properties preservation plan working group within DNR. The State Historic Preservation Division supported the bill and said it would help create a statewide database and better planning for state-owned historic properties, while noting its current review work is reactive and project-by-project. The committee asked about duplication and existing consultation processes; SHPD said it already reviews state projects under existing law and has in-house architectural staff. The measure was then set aside after brief discussion, with no vote shown in the excerpt. Next was Senate Bill 2341, which would authorize phased review of certain private-property projects and change SHPD’s review deadlines. SHPD and the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development supported the bill, saying it could encourage more proactive, programmatic review and that the current average review time for simple projects is about 56 days. Several opponents, including Sierra Club of Hawaii, Bianca Isaki, Malama Kane Lua, and Tara Roas, argued phased review would delay projects, create conflict, and weaken historic preservation protections, especially for iwi kūpuna and burial sites. Committee members raised concerns about whether the bill conflicted with prior court decisions and asked SHPD for its view; SHPD said it was not a legal question for them and suggested a programmatic alternative. The bill was not voted on in the excerpt. Finally, the committee began hearing Senate Bill 2306 on administrative fees for the Bureau of Conveyances. HGEA opposed the measure, focusing on a provision allowing the special fund to be used for qualified contractors, while the Bureau of Conveyances supported the bill as a fee correction that would equalize recording fees between systems. The bureau said specialized technical work sometimes requires outside contracting and that it could consider a contract period; the chair and members discussed the HGEA concern and asked whether the issue could be addressed. No final action was shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• that we're going to have Pat Rivers come up and we'll just hold questions for a minute and hear from DNR
• record, my name is Pat Rivers, deputy director for the Division of Fish and Wildlife at the Minnesota DNR
• I want to thank the Minnesota DNR.
• The question that I have would actually be for, uh, you know, our individual from the DNR here.
• know our um individual from the DNR know our um individual from the DNR here.<00:09:15.519> Um

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, this is asked for by Bob Meyer of DNR.
• The DNR likes this. Uh, could hunt bear. The DNR likes this.
• than us take direction from the DNR.
• So over 50% of goes right to the DNR.
• University of Minnesota and the DNR. University of Minnesota and the DNR.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We still want DNR to do the big things.
• We still want instead of leaning on DNR.
• Uh a fire DNR to do the big things.
• And so those are the things we kind of would rely on for DNR.
• Obviously, we want DNR to help with the really big things.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Culture and the Arts held an informational briefing with representatives from ʻIolani Palace and Bishop Museum to discuss how the Legislature can better support state-funded cultural institutions during the interim and into the next session. Chair Capella said the goal was to understand current needs, preserve Hawaiian culture and history, and expand educational access. No votes or formal actions were taken during the briefing. ʻIolani Palace’s representative described the Friends of ʻIolani Palace’s role as the nonprofit supporting repair, restoration, maintenance, and public education for the state monument. She said state operational funding and ARPA funds were critical to keeping the palace open, maintaining HVAC and other systems, and funding repairs that would otherwise fall to DLNR. She highlighted ongoing and planned projects including a fire suppression system, HVAC improvements, basement exhibit work, plumbing repairs, elevator replacement, etched glass restoration, and school-tour access. She also noted that a prior $150,000 CIP for windows and doors had not yet been released, and said the organization is exploring ways to bring more neighbor island students to the palace through transportation support, airline partnerships, and digital outreach. Bishop Museum’s representatives outlined the museum’s history, its role as the state museum of natural and cultural history, and its extensive collections in archives, archaeology, botany, entomology, zoology, and cryopreservation. They emphasized the museum’s work in preservation, research, environmental stewardship, and public education, including free access through Museums for All, daily programming, and cultural festivals and community events. They said state funding has been essential for staffing, IT security, fire suppression, and infrastructure needs, and that digitization of the museum’s 25 million objects is a major ongoing initiative to preserve and share Hawaiʻi’s history and knowledge.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um first up, we have DNR in support. Um first up, we have DNR in support.
• DNR, I'm just curious: when DNR talks about appraised value payment, is that a one-time payment or is
• First up we have um DNR. Good our seven. First up we have um DNR.
• <01:04:39.400> asking resolutions has been about DNR asking resolutions has been about DNR
• H is DNR or or is to be addressed.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several shoreline easement resolutions and a water-supply study resolution. For the easement measures, the Department of Land and Natural Resources supported each item, and testimony also came from affected landowners and community members. Members asked about why some easements were granted gratis to public agencies, with DLNR explaining that those cases involved public infrastructure such as stormwater management and did not require bonds or rent. For private properties, DLNR described the standard process of monthly rent during the legislative approval gap, followed by a one-time appraised payment for a 25-year easement once the appraisal is completed. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on shoreline erosion and whether hardened shoreline structures or seawalls were contributing to beach loss. On one measure, DLNR explained that a large sandbag shoreline structure was tied to a nearby boat harbor that had altered sand movement over time, causing flanking erosion on adjacent unarmored property. On another, DLNR said a wall built under a valid 1960s permit was originally a boundary or landscaping wall, but now functions as a seawall as the shoreline has migrated landward. Members raised concerns about fairness, public beach access, and whether adjacent owners should share costs, and DLNR responded that shoreline matters are handled parcel by parcel under existing statute. The committee also heard support for a resolution creating a task force or study on desalination. DLNR’s Commission on Water Resource Management supported the intent but asked for more time to complete a comprehensive report, noting the work would require substantial staffing and coordination. The Board of Water Supply and CARES also testified in support, with CARES emphasizing future water-supply needs, cultural and historic preservation concerns, and the importance of coordinating with other agencies. DLNR said it would rely on existing studies and work with county agencies and the Department of Health. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So at this time I'd like to pass it to my DNR colleague Laura. Thank you, Lisa.
• So at this time I'd like to pass it to my DNR colleague Laura. Thank you, Lisa.
• And it hurts the DNR. We'd respectfully ask that you find a better home for it.
• And it hurts the DNR. We'd respectfully ask that you find a better home for it.
• And it hurts the DNR. We'd respectfully ask that you find a better home for it.

Bills: HF2563

Keywords: HF2563, legacy finance bill, Legacy Amendment, outdoor heritage fund, clean water fund, parks and trails fund, arts and cultural heritage fund, Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, Clean Water Council, Minnesota legacy funds, habitat conservation, prairie restoration, wetland restoration, forest conservation, riparian buffers, water quality, groundwater protection, drinking water, septic systems, watershed planning

Transcript Highlights:

• addresses the DNR components.
• It's also should be a priority at the DNR, and we look forward to working with DNR and with you to enhance
• this bill or a separate reform package that addresses the DNR components.
• addresses the DNR components.
• It's also should be a priority at the DNR, and we look forward to working with DNR and with you to enhance

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• He said they take an objective analysis to all projects DNR proposes and all bills that are introduced
• Next we have Assistant Commissioner Bob Meyer, DNR. Good afternoon, members.
• Joe Henderson, Division Director for the Lands and Minerals Division at the Minnesota DNR, introduced
• The DNR hired a professional appraiser outside the agency who does this for a living to appraise these
• in a talk and yourself DNR in a talk and yourself what<00:41:28.480> to<00:41:28.640> do

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up HF 1425, which would prohibit the sale of state-owned school trust lands in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness to the federal government and instead require a land trade. Representative Skraba argued the federal wilderness law requires an exchange, not a sale, and said the state should trade Boundary Waters school trust lands for federal lands elsewhere, citing potential benefits for logging, mining, and school trust revenue. He said the current proposed sale price was too low and moved to lay the bill over for possible inclusion in a future bill. Later, he withdrew a DE1 amendment and instead moved to re-refer the bill to the Education Finance Committee, but that motion failed. Testimony was largely opposed to the bill. Aaron Vandal of the Office of School Trust Lands said the exchange option was no longer viable, that the lands have produced no revenue for education for decades, and that selling them is the trust’s last opportunity to generate returns for schoolchildren. Bob Meyer of the DNR supported Vandal’s position and said the agency could not negotiate mineral rights in the way suggested. Aon Clems of the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and Amanda Hefner of Save the Boundary Waters both opposed HF 1425, though they emphasized different reasons: Clems argued a sale best fulfills the state’s fiduciary duty to maximize long-term returns for education, while Hefner said a sale would harm public education funding, align with the trust’s original purpose, and help consolidate federal ownership in the wilderness. Members then questioned the valuation and the practical differences between a sale and an exchange. Representative Jacob challenged the low per-acre price and asked about the federal government’s set-aside amount, while Representative Fischer asked how the appraisal was determined. DNR lands and minerals director Joe Henderson explained the valuation came from an independent appraiser, was based on the wilderness restrictions and lack of development potential, and was from a 2020 appraisal that is now being updated. Representative Schultz supported the sale approach and said the state should not transfer the land at such a low price. The committee did not advance the bill to the Education Finance Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just wanted to touch for the DNR.
• Does the DNR have a... So you got two of these.
• I just want to say that the DNR are the DNR enforcement officer or conservation officer are more of a
• :49.800> um the DNR um the DNR um are<00:25:50.920> the<00:25:51.640> uh are the
• <00:26:13.080> officer uh conservation officer or DNR officer uh conservation officer or DNR

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• DNR has rights to water that we don't use all of them, and we would like more flexibility to use those
• And then also on this thing, it says we had a 30% reduction in burn DNR acres.
• But that is a reduction in DNR acres.
• But that is a reduction in DNR acres.
• A DNR dozer, as well as that multi-mission aircraft over the fire within the first hour.

Summary: The Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a work session with an update from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Commissioner Dave Upthe Grove outlined DNR’s size and scope, previewed agency-request legislation, and emphasized budget priorities. He said DNR will seek authority to sell ecosystem service credits, better use underutilized water rights with tribal consultation, add a tribal representative to the State Board of Natural Resources, make minor timber-sales efficiencies, and include wildland firefighters in the LEOFF pension system. He also urged restoration of wildfire prevention and preparedness funding, warning that reduced funding would mean fewer firefighters, less forest health work, and less support for rural fire districts. He noted DNR’s wildfire suppression costs are rising and argued prevention spending can reduce larger, more expensive fires. State Forester George Geisler followed with a detailed wildfire season review. He said Washington now responds to fires year-round and also assists other states, including Texas. He described DNR’s use of 31 aircraft, 691 firefighters, and corrections-based crews, and said the agency’s success rate for keeping fires under 10 acres improved slightly from 93.7% to 94.1%. He highlighted increased arson activity, especially around Spokane, and described the Crescent Road Fire as an example of early detection, rapid response, and the use of bulldozers, aircraft, and hand crews to contain a fire to 182 acres with no structure losses. Senator Saldan praised the emphasis on prevention and the use of bulldozers as cost-effective tools. Assistant deputy supervisor Dwayne Emmons then reviewed the trust land transfer program, which was codified in statute in 2023 after being funded through the capital budget for decades. He said more than 130,000 acres of underperforming trust land have been transferred since the 1990s to other public or tribal entities for more appropriate use, while DNR acquires replacement lands to keep the trust whole. He described the current application and ranking process, including tribal input, and said DNR is requesting funding for remaining parcels from the last round, including portions of Tract C, Babcock Bench, and Middle Fork Snoqualmie. In questions, Senator Wagoner raised concerns about DNR’s decision to remove some acres from timber harvest rotation and its impact on local revenue and mills; the commissioner responded that current five-year harvest plans provide short-term stability and that any changes would be explored through the Board of Natural Resources process, not through immediate reductions in supply. The committee then received a history briefing from staff member Jeff Olson on the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission and agency structure. He traced the evolution from early fish and game commissioners to the current commission-appointed director model adopted by voter-approved Referendum 45 in 1995. Olson explained the commission’s statutory duties, membership requirements, and how Washington compares with other states. Chair Chapman said he had no plans to hear a bill this session changing the commission’s makeup, but he expressed personal interest in exploring reforms, accountability, and possibly a future broader coalition or referendum process. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational only, and the chair adjourned the session with holiday and New Year’s wishes.

Transcript Highlights:

• DNR that covers<00:14:55.399> this.
• The fee changes at the DNR start on line 138.
• a open appropriation for the DNR a open appropriation for the DNR regulatory<00:22:07.520> account
• , to call our commissioner of DNR, to call our commissioner of DNR, Commissioner Strowman.<00:38:
• <01:27:07.600> legislative endorsed by the 2025 DNR legislative endorsed by the 2025 DNR legislative

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, we're aware of DNR and OPSD's testimony, and DNR just deferred to OPSD.
• Uh, we're aware of uh DNR and measure.
• uh OPSD's uh testimony and OP uh DNR uh OPSD's uh testimony and OP uh DNR just<00:53:08.079>
• Uh, with that, I am functions of DNR.
• follow up with um OPSD and DNR follow up with um OPSD and DNR on<01:15:47.920> this without

Bills: SB2982, SB2367, SB2818, SB2944, SB2022, SB2240, SB2986, SB2547, SB2401, SB3031, SB3035, SB3032

Keywords: foreign influence, campaign finance, contributions, state elections, transparency, election integrity, Ala Wai Small Boat Harbor, Ala Wai Harbor, DLNR, BLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Board of Land and Natural Resources, state boating facility, small boat harbor, public-private partnership, PPP, marina management, harbor lease, fast lands, submerged lands

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures, beginning with SB 2982 on campaign finance, which would prohibit foreign entities and foreign-influence businesses from making contributions and expenditures. The Attorney General’s office testified first, followed by the Campaign Spending Commission, which supported the bill but asked for clarification on constitutional review authority and additional implementation time for certifications, forms, and procedures. Common Cause also supported the measure, arguing it would help protect elections from dark money and foreign influence. No vote was taken. The committee then took up SB 2367 on a state boating facilities lease program for the Ala Wai small boat harbor. DLNR supported the bill, while UPW opposed it, warning about privatization of a public asset and possible job displacement. Several members of the public supported the concept but urged amendments to protect public access, affordability, youth ocean programs, and state employee jobs. Committee members questioned DLNR about the scope of the lease, the role of the Board of Land and Natural Resources, and whether public access and existing concessions would remain protected. DLNR said current leases would remain, the board would retain approval authority, and employees would not necessarily be displaced, but members indicated more discussion and possible amendments were needed. For SB 2818 on boating penalties, DLNR testified in support and there was no opposition testimony. The committee also heard SB 2944 on conservation, which would require wildlife viewing guidelines that substantially conform to NOAA guidance and reporting requirements; DLNR said it stood on its written testimony. SB 2022 on water code penalties drew support from DLNR’s Commission on Water Resource Management, which said the bill’s two-tiered penalty structure would preserve deterrence while keeping the current $5,000 penalty for first-time or non-harmful violations. The Board of Water Supply submitted comments, and Ulupono Initiative supported the measure as a needed enforcement tool. Committee members discussed whether the higher penalty ceiling should be phased in and asked for stakeholder input on the amount of the penalties. Finally, the committee began SB 2240 on land use, which would require water availability certification from the Commission on Water Resource Management before a district boundary amendment proceeds to the Land Use Commission. DLNR supported the bill and said it often reviews project documents that lack sufficient information on water needs and availability, so the measure would allow earlier review and comment. The committee also indicated it would seek amendments and further feedback on the water penalty bill before it moved to the next committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are already required to make sure that the DNR is available and provided to fire.
• Not everybody has a DNR, right?
• Not everybody has a DNR, right?
• Jake, the DNR in Arizona law is on a big orange piece of paper physically.
• But when we boiled down the conversations last week, it was really about the DNR.

Bills: SB1176, SB1186, SB1235, SB1286, SB1446, SB1458, SB1515, SB1616, SB1641, SB1668, SB1670, SB1678, SB1747, SB1787

Keywords: stormwater, water storage, replenishment credits, groundwater, aquifer, Arizona Revised Statutes, disclosure, state contracts, procurement records, donations, transparency, EMS, reciprocity, interstate compact, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, licensure, public safety, military personnel, veterinary telemedicine

Summary: The committee approved the minutes and then heard Senate Bill 1668, which would extend the deadline for funeral establishments or responsible persons to submit required documentation from seven calendar days to 14 business days and make related changes involving disposition of unborn or stillborn children, minors, and abortion clinic forms. Funeral industry testimony said the current timelines are difficult to meet and create stress for grieving families, while a mother described problems caused by requiring an ex-spouse’s signature after her child’s death. The bill passed on a 4-3 vote, with some members supporting the timing and family-law fixes and others objecting to the abortion-clinic provisions. The committee then took up Senate Bill 1286, on veterinary telemedicine prescriptions. An amendment shortened the telemedicine prescription period for non-antimicrobial drugs from 60 days to 30 days, allowed antimicrobial prescriptions for up to 14 days based on an electronic exam, and barred further antimicrobial prescriptions without an in-person exam. Veterinarians and the Arizona Veterinary Medical Association moved to neutral on the amended bill but warned about safety, overprescribing, and the limits of telemedicine; supporters argued it would improve access for rural, elderly, and low-income pet owners. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the bill as amended on a 4-3 vote. Senate Bill 1235, creating the emergency services personnel licensure interstate compact, passed unanimously after sponsor testimony that it would improve reciprocity for EMTs and paramedics and help military personnel. Senate Bill 1446, which would change dialysis-center social worker documentation from monthly to quarterly, also passed unanimously, with DeVita Dialysis Services saying the change would reduce paperwork and align Arizona with federal and most-state practice. Senate Bill 1515, a cleanup bill for the Industrial Commission of Arizona that renames positions, removes outdated duties, and changes publication of fee schedules, passed after an amendment and supportive agency testimony. The committee also heard Senate Bill 1678, which would require direct-care staff in certain facilities to complete patient information forms and reestablish the Vulnerable Adult Systems Study Committee. An amendment removed the form requirement and instead required DHS to investigate complaints from EMS personnel about missing DNR orders; first responders and provider groups supported the revised approach, though some members wanted minority-party appointments added to the study committee. The bill passed as amended on a 6-0-1 vote. Finally, the committee began hearing Senate Bill 1747 on social media protections for minors, with the sponsor framing it as a child-safety measure and opponents from NetChoice, TechNet, and Meta warning about privacy risks, age-verification problems, constitutional concerns, and the possibility that teens would evade restrictions; supporters argued parents need stronger controls and pointed to app-store-based alternatives, but no vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We could cut all of the DNR, every single thing they do, every person over there, every job, every state
• We could cut all of the DNR, every single thing they do, every person over there, every job, every state
• We could cut all of the DNR, every single thing they do, every person over there, every job, every state
• We could cut all of the DNR, every single thing they do, every person over there, every job, every state
• We could cut all of the DNR, every single thing they do, every person over there, every job, every state

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The governor discussed Minnesota’s budget outlook ahead of a supplemental budget release next month, saying the state remains financially strong but should be cautious because of federal uncertainty and a structural imbalance in spending. He said the administration’s approach will be measured, with limited new spending and possibly modest revenue measures, while prioritizing a bonding bill and maintaining the state’s AAA bond rating, reserves, and middle-class tax cuts. He also praised the 2023 legislative session and bipartisan cooperation as the basis for the state’s current position. A major topic was spending growth in special education and the broader human services system. The governor said special education is a fundamental service the state is legally and morally obligated to provide, but costs need to be managed more efficiently. He pointed to legacy IT systems in the Department of Human Services and county service delivery as expensive, antiquated, and error-prone, and said the state needs a multi-year modernization plan and continued reorganization. He argued that reforms such as prepayment verification and other fraud controls should reduce costs without cutting services. The governor also addressed federal actions affecting Medicaid and other programs, sharply criticizing efforts to withhold funds and claims of widespread fraud. He said Minnesota’s Medicaid error rate is lower than the national average and argued that the federal government’s approach would harm children, pregnant women, and seniors without improving fraud prevention. He also said the state’s gun violence prevention and fraud-fighting packages are expected to be relatively close to budget neutral. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken in the meeting, which was primarily a press availability and Q&A.

Transcript Highlights:

• The DNR did what they did in interpreting it and provided this document to them.
• The DNR has concerns about the changes proposed in this bill.
• I've heard that you or the DNR had put out suggestions for fences.
• My question is for the DNR again.
• There should be one, the state or the DNR.

Transcript Highlights:

• And DNR is very good. We actually Yeah. And DNR is very good.
• First up we have DNR with comments.
• First up we have DNR with comments.
• First up we have DNR with comments.
• We're going to push out the date that DNR sets the rules to 2030. That DNR sets the rules to 2030.

Bills: HB1817, HB2056, HB2616, HB1718, HB1842, HB1740, HB1919, HB1616, HB1774, HB1984, HB1603, HB2171

Keywords: fishing regulation, ʻamaʻama, striped mullet, bag limit, overfishing, Hawaii fisheries, funding, appropriations, Honolulu, housing, construction, grant-in-aid, community development, Banyan Drive, Hawaii community development authority, cultural revitalization, special fund, public safety, economic development, affordable housing

Summary: The committee heard HB 1817, which would create a daily bag limit for amaa/ama fish to protect Hawaii’s fisheries. DLNR said the biggest stressor on amaa populations is diversion of freshwater flows that cut off food sources for juvenile fish, and suggested that place-by-place rulemaking with fishers and stakeholders would be the most effective approach. A teacher and several Waialua Elementary students testified in strong support, describing research on declining catch data, cultural importance, and the need to preserve the fish for future generations. Other supporters said the fish is being outcompeted by invasive species and cited historical declines, including testimony that bag limits in Hilo Bay have helped increase populations. Committee members asked DLNR about traditional and cultural gathering rights, whether the bill’s bag limit would apply to native Hawaiian practices, and whether the limit was 10 per day or per season. DLNR said constitutional Hawaiian practices are protected, but also noted that if the bag limit is set in statute it would limit the department’s flexibility to tailor rules by area. Members also asked about other conservation efforts, and DLNR said fish pond revitalization and amaa production are underway statewide. One member raised concern that a statewide statutory limit might not fit conditions on every island, and DLNR said it has authority to adopt area-specific rules through rulemaking, though that process can take months to more than a year. The committee then moved to HP 206, an appropriations measure for the City and County of Honolulu involving school land transfers, and HP 266B relating to Banyan Drive. On HP 206, the county said the request is a one-time item and estimated costs were about $3.25 million, with the city and county already spending more than $350,000 on the transfers. On HP 266B, HCDA said it is conducting a master planning effort for Banyan Drive and plans a community visioning exercise this summer. Testimony from the Banyan Drive redevelopment agency emphasized the need for more flexible land-tenure rules, while OHA supported the bill with amendments to include cultural specialists and lineal descendants in the redevelopment process and to protect ceded lands. No votes were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• One is that it reverses the roles of the Office of Planning and DNR, turning DNR into an agency that
• Um, I believe that like from a turning DNR into a agency that reviews turning DNR into a agency that
• um method and somehow switch back DNR um method and somehow switch back DNR and<00:29:24.399>
• DNR, Division of Forestry and Wildlife. DNR, Division of Forestry and Wildlife.
• turned into DNR turned into DNR >> and<01:34:43.199> a<01:34:43.520> record<

Bills: HB1846, HB2205, HB1802, HB1571, HB2047, HB2434, HB2426, HB2361, HB2395, HB1712, HB2544, HB1619

Keywords: coastal erosion, shoreline properties, regional planning, mitigation districts, sediment management, environmental impact, public access, community financing, shoreline erosion, emergency permits, coastal management, erosion control, Hawaii Revised Statutes, HB1802, conservation banking, conservation bank, mitigation banking, compensatory mitigation, incidental take permit, incidental take license

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1846, relating to shoreline mitigation districts. DLNR and the Office of Planning opposed the bill, arguing it would improperly shift regulatory roles between the agencies and prioritize private land interests over public trust and natural and historic resources. Supporters, including the Shoreline Preservation Coalition, Kahana Bay residents, and Hawaii Realtors, said regional planning is needed to address severe erosion, especially in Kahana, and that better coordination between state and county agencies could help move stalled projects forward. Testifiers emphasized that shoreline conditions vary by area and that science-based, region-specific solutions are needed. Members asked questions about whether existing law already allows regional planning and emergency shoreline responses. DLNR said it already has authority to process regional projects and cited an existing draft EIS for Kahana Bay that would proceed through normal permitting and public hearing channels. Supporters responded that the bill would provide a clearer regional planning framework and help communities facing urgent erosion impacts. No vote was taken on HB 1846 in the portion provided. The committee then took up HB 2205, relating to emergency erosion mitigation. DLNR opposed the bill, saying it already has authority to issue emergency permits and had recently done so quickly for a collapsed sidewalk at Queen Surf Beach, and warning that the bill’s language could weaken Act 16 by changing a prohibition on shoreline hardening to a requirement to merely minimize it. Kahana Bay representatives and other supporters argued the bill would create a limited, regulated short-term pathway for emergency shoreline solutions while long-term plans are developed, and said current permits have expired or stalled, leaving dangerous sandbags and no practical relief. Additional testimony from a private homeowner stressed that erosion is threatening homes and that private owners are often bearing the cost of protecting public shoreline access. The discussion remained focused on balancing emergency protection, public access, and long-term shoreline management, and no final action was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We really deeply value and appreciate the work of the DNR grant administrators.
• We hold the DNR in very high regard. They do exceptional work and have been amazing partners.
• The DNR and the metropolitan area receive 40% each of the parks and trails Legacy fund.
• greater min Minnesota by paying the DNR greater min Minnesota by paying the DNR a<01:03:57.799><
• as the metro and the DNR as the metro and the DNR and<01:04:56.440> as<01:04:56.599> Renee

Keywords: 1187, senate, all