Transcript Highlights:

• access to potable and agricultural water on Hawaiian homelands, provided that any agreement between DHHL
• Um, DHHL, with regards to the egg lots that DHHL did have in a district that I served prior to the new
• I would note that in the Kai Lawa development district, DHHL has exempted itself from subsection B.
• <00:32:56.240> exempted<00:32:56.720> itself<00:32:57.279> from The district, DHHL
• Up next is DHHL. Good afternoon, chairs and members of the committee.

Bills: SB1406, SB521, SB3247, SB1654, SB1112, SB1301, SB2443, SB2996

Keywords: historic preservation, burial sites, DHHL, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, DLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, section 6E-8, Hawaii Revised Statutes, Hawaii Register of Historic Places, National Register of Historic Places, cultural resources, archaeology, land use review, environmental review, state historic preservation officer, Hawaiian home lands, project permits, consultation, concurrence, nonconcurrence

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures affecting Hawaiian affairs, historic preservation, water access, and land governance. SB 1406 would let the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands assume historic preservation review for projects on lands under its jurisdiction, except for properties listed or nominated for the state or national historic registers. DHHL supported the bill, while a descendant testifier strongly opposed it, arguing that burial and preservation review protects ancestors and should not be streamlined or reduced. No questions were raised and the bill was moved on after testimony. SB 521 would require DHHL to work with county water boards or water departments to provide potable and agricultural water on Hawaiian homelands, with agreements made public. DHHL said it already works with counties but objected to the bill’s mandatory language, saying it could undermine the department’s discretion and independence. A public testifier supported the measure, and committee discussion focused on how water requirements could affect subsistence lots and infrastructure decisions. The committee then took up SB 3247, which would create a Royal Mausoleum Commission within DLNR to oversee preservation, operations, and outreach at Mauna Ala. State Parks said it valued existing collaboration with the aliʻi trusts but wanted clarity on roles, coordination, and funding if a new commission is created. The Royal Order of Kamehameha strongly supported the bill as a culturally grounded way to protect the site, while several other testifiers opposed it, saying the real issue is the curator selection process and warning that a commission could add bureaucracy and delay. The committee also heard SB 1654, authorizing transfer of certain state lands to DHHL, and SB 112, which would add the DHHL chair or designee to the Hawaii Community Development Authority; the Attorney General and HCDA offered technical and policy comments, with HCDA opposing the board change and DHHL supporting participation to protect beneficiary interests. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• DHHL is really about the land owners.
• We believe the simple solution is what DHHL recommended.
• um DHHL um DHHL um<00:19:08.320> and<00:19:08.880> also<00:19:09.440> the<00
• <00:21:30.640> on are designated egg lands under DHHL on are designated egg lands under DHHL
• <00:32:51.200> of um there is a preference for DHHL of um there is a preference for DHHL of

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Triple C committee heard SB 2799, relating to the Kalopa settlement. Testimony was largely supportive, with several individuals and homestead organizations urging passage and asking that Hawaiian Homes Commission, HHCA beneficiaries, and community representatives be included in transition planning. The Department of Health opposed the added reporting requirement as unnecessary and argued its role is limited to patient care, while committee members pushed back and emphasized the need for broader community input and landowner participation, especially from DHHL and DLNR. The chair recommended passage of SB 2799 unamended, with a committee report noting that the required May report should include the interagency transition working group timeline, proposed budget, and proposed procedures. The recommendation was adopted unanimously by the committees present. The joint agenda also took up SB 2887, which would expand the important agricultural land qualified agricultural tax credit to include Hawaiian homelands used for subsistence or agricultural/pastoral purposes and broaden eligible costs to include orchard or fruit-bearing crops and clearing former sugar and pineapple lands. The Department of Land and Natural Resources supported the concept but requested amendments; the Department of Taxation and Department of Agriculture provided comments and information on administration and existing claims. The Hawaii Farm Bureau supported the intent but argued the bill should create a new tax credit in Chapter 235 rather than fold DHHL lands into the existing IAL credit. After discussion, the chair recommended passage with the Hawaii Farm Bureau’s amendments and technical changes, and both committees adopted that recommendation. The Hawaiian Affairs committee then acted on several bills. SB 1406, SB 521, and SB 1654 were deferred indefinitely because the chair said related work was already underway and the committee wanted to avoid duplicative paperwork. SB 3247, relating to Mona Ala/Royal Mausoleum, was amended to convert the proposal into a Royal Mausoleum Working Group with periodic reporting and stakeholder input, and it passed with amendments. SB 112, SB 131, and SB 2443 were advanced with amendments that primarily deferred effective dates to keep the measures moving while discussions continue. The committee also noted that some measures were being deferred or reshaped to align with ongoing administrative or companion-bill processes, and the amended recommendations were adopted by the members present.

Transcript Highlights:

• For our testifiers, we have DHHL chair, vice chair, department. Thank you.
• For our testifiers, we have DHHL chair, vice chair, department. Thank you.
• You can ask DHHL or the governor's package for questions. Aloha.
• You can ask DHHL or the governor's package for questions. Aloha.
• Up first is DHHL for testifying. Up first is DHHL for testifying. Hello, Vice Chair. Thank you.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Hawaiian Affairs heard several Department of Hawaiian Home Lands measures. SB 2635 would appropriate funds for DHHL land development, land purchases, and mortgage or rental subsidies to address the wait list; DHHL and five supporters testified in favor, and the committee later recommended passage with amendments, including a date defect, with the measure adopted as amended. SB 2924 would authorize funding for a capital improvement project for the Kaneili Community Hall, access road, and parking lot; DHHL stood on testimony in support, Randall Ao and another online testifier spoke in favor, and the committee later amended the bill to shift the funding structure from general obligation bonds to general funds before passing it. SB 3127 would raise the state liability cap for DHHL-related borrowing and guaranteed loans from $100 million to $500 million; DHHL testified, no other testimony was offered, and the committee passed it with amendments, including a date defect. The committee also heard SB 3248, which establishes labor requirements for Aleha Products. No testifier from the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands Board was present, and there was no additional testimony or questions during the hearing. During decision-making, the chair noted there was both support and some opposition but recommended passage with amendments, including a date defect, and the committee adopted the recommendation unanimously. The meeting concluded after all three decision-making votes were completed and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So how much money right now is going to DHHL development?
• Hawaiians on the Hawaiian home list dhhl Hawaiians on the Hawaiian home list dhhl weight<00:26:19.120
• Why does DHHL need the DERF funds as collateral?
• Well, I mean, this was a DHHL bill, so it wasn't our request. Okay.
• Well, I mean, this was a DHHL bill, so it wasn't our request. Okay.

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:

• could I I would rather have dhhl could I I would rather have dhhl administer<00:07:00.360> that
• DHHL support, thank you.
• applicant or it's a DHHL project.
• applicant or it's a DHHL project.
• applicant or it's a DHHL project.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 834, which would change restrictions on transfers of real property under chapter 201H, HRS, and was discussed in the context of Hawaiian homelands and HHFDC-funded projects. Supporters, including HHFDC, DHHL, and individual testifiers, said the bill would clarify that Hawaiian homelands should not be subject to the 201H buyback and appreciation restrictions, while preserving affordability requirements tied to federal mortgage and tax credit programs. HHFDC explained that the main concern was the buyback/share-appreciation provisions, especially for DHHL projects using LIHTC or similar financing, and said aligning the statute with DHHL’s program goals would not be a problem. Members questioned whether removing the restrictions could weaken affordability protections, and whether the state could still prioritize beneficiaries and workforce housing, but no vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up SB 759, which would add the DHHL chairperson or designee to the HHFDC board of directors and adjust quorum requirements. DHHL and several supporters argued the measure would give Hawaiian Homes a seat at the table, improve access to HHFDC funding sources such as tax credits, private activity bonds, and revolving funds, and help leverage limited resources to reduce the Hawaiian Homes waitlist. One testifier supported the bill but urged safeguards to prevent favoritism or abuse of power, and another raised concerns about whether a DHHL representative would need to recuse from voting on projects involving DHHL. HHFDC testified that DHHL projects still must compete under the same criteria and set-asides as other applicants, and that the board already includes multiple public and executive representatives. Members pressed on whether DHHL could achieve the same informational goals without a voting seat, and whether the added board role would create leverage or conflicts. The DHHL witness said a nonvoting role could provide information, but a voting seat would be more useful for decision-making and advocacy. The discussion also covered DHHL’s use of LIHTC, rent-to-own models, transitional housing, and other layered financing, as well as the broader need to coordinate state housing resources. The transcript ends during continued questioning, with no final committee action or vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• DHHL cannot skirt an environmental review.
• And I oppose DHHL doing this continuously to our families, our Hawaiian families on the oldest DHHL lands
• And I oppose DHHL doing this continuously to our families, our Hawaiian families on the oldest DHHL lands
• And I oppose DHHL doing this continuously to our families, our Hawaiian families on the oldest DHHL lands
• And I oppose DHHL doing this continuously to our families, our Hawaiian families on the oldest DHHL lands

Bills: HB1924, HB2121, HB1928, HB1979, HB1650, HB1543, HB1981, HB1982

Keywords: mattress recycling, waste management, producer responsibility, environmental health, steafardship program, electronic cigarettes, disposable devices, environmental protection, plastic pollution, lithium batteries, pollution control, public health, deposit beverage container, bottle bill, container deposit law, container redemption, recycling refund, extended producer responsibility, EPR, deposit return system

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures related to waste, recycling, and environmental review. On HB 1924, which would establish a mattress stewardship program, the Department of Health said it stood on written testimony and offered comments, while Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition and one individual supported the bill and the International Sleep Products Association opposed it. No questions were raised and the committee moved on. A large portion of the hearing focused on HB 2121, which would prohibit the sale of disposable vapes in Hawaii. The Department of Health supported the measure but suggested the bill may be better placed in a different part of state law because the cited waste-management section regulates products after consumption, while still praising the effort to remove disposable vapes from the market and environment. Testimony in strong support came from the Coalition for Tobacco Free Hawaii Youth Council, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii COPD Coalition, Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center, the City and County of Honolulu, and many individuals; supporters emphasized youth vaping, toxic waste, lithium battery fire risks, and environmental harm. There was at least one opposing individual and the International Sleep Products Association was listed in opposition. The committee noted there were many written testimonies and no immediate vote was taken. The committee also heard HB 1928 on the deposit beverage container recycling program. The Department of Health stood on written testimony. The Solid Waste Task Force of Hawaii Environmental Change Agents and Upstream supported the bill but urged amendments to better integrate reuse and reusables, strengthen enforcement, clarify definitions, and protect existing redemption centers. The Hawaii Food Industry Association supported the concept of a backdrop program but preferred strengthening the existing program and raised concerns about undefined fees, existing infrastructure, and future audit costs. The Chamber of Commerce Hawaii supported the bill, and the chair said the measure needs work and that decision-making would occur in a few days. Finally, the committee took up HB 979 on environmental review and HB 1650 on environmental assessments. For HB 979, OPSD offered amendments, HCDA supported the bill but suggested clarifying the affordable-housing definition, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative supported it, and Earthjustice was asked about the court process for environmental challenges; the chair asked about shortening the challenge period and the relationship between environmental court, the intermediate court of appeals, and the Supreme Court. For HB 1650, OPSD and the State Historic Preservation Division stood on written testimony, OHA asked to retain historic sites, and several groups and individuals testified in support or opposition. Opponents argued that removing Wiki special district and historic sites from Chapter 343 trigger language would weaken environmental review and risk impacts to iwi kūpuna and historic resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• Question for DHHL. Would it be to you? Sure. I'm with DHHL.
• internal review eligibility for DHHL internal review eligibility for DHHL should<01:47:03.360>
• concerns that DHHL their projects? concerns that DHHL their projects?
• 6C requirements and then gave the DHHL 6C requirements and then gave DHHL<01:59:25.440> financial
• <02:00:46.159> uh Good afternoon Watson uh for DHHL. uh Good afternoon Watson uh for DHHL.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2046, which would establish and fund an Olo Hawaii Commission to coordinate and promote initiatives supporting the use of Olo Hawaii. The Attorney General suggested adding an end date because the bill creates a temporary commission, and several supporters from the University of Hawaii, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission said the commission could improve coordination, funding decisions, and consistency across agencies. Members discussed whether the commission should include broader representation, including expertise on Niihau dialect speakers and other stakeholders, and the bill was then set aside as the committee moved to the next measure. The committee next considered House Bill 2438, creating the Hawaii Cultural Trust within DBEDT, authorizing an income tax credit for contributions to the trust and qualified cultural organizations, and creating a special license plate to support the trust. DBEDT said it would need additional resources, including staff, to administer the program. The Department of Taxation recommended changing the effective date to 2026 to allow time for implementation and adding a requirement that credits be claimed within one year. OHA supported the bill but objected to language that would require it to maintain a prequalified list of organizations, saying that could limit applicants and conflict with its grant process. The Tax Foundation said it supported cultural funding but preferred direct appropriations and grants over a trust fund and tax credit structure. The final measure discussed was House Bill 2584, which would temporarily increase public land trust revenues transferred to OHA while reaffirming the state’s obligation to the 20% pro rata share, with a repeal date of June 30, 2028. The Attorney General recommended deleting the bill’s requirement that OHA receive a minimum amount equal to the 20% share, arguing the constitution and Admission Act do not specify a precise dollar amount and that the legislature must determine allocation. OHA strongly supported the bill, arguing the state currently pays only about 5% and that historical records show much higher amounts are owed; OHA also pointed to a carry-forward account it said held about $55 million. DLNR opposed the bill because the fiscal impact was unspecified and could affect land management and special fund budgets. Several OHA trustees and supporters urged the committee to pass the bill, and one testifier criticized the state for underfunding Native Hawaiian obligations. No votes were taken in the portion provided, and the committee continued hearing testimony on HB 2584.

Transcript Highlights:

• DHHL is ultimately a claim against the state and potentially a claim against the public fisc.
• passes um unless the intent is for dhhl passes um unless the intent is for dhhl to<00:58:50.079>
• Um, DHHL has independent counsel. They had independent counsel in the Nelson lawsuit.
• Uh, DHHL, I believe, has independent counsel on some of its telecom matters.
• work for DHHL on some development matters.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 410, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ biennium operating budget. OHA asked for a modest increase over its base budget, including $1.2 million to fund 13 new full-time positions for a strategy and implementation team tied to its long-term plan, with emphasis on housing, education, health, and economic resilience. OHA also described a broader effort to work directly with executive branch departments to improve outcomes for Native Hawaiians. Testimony was largely supportive, with several individuals speaking in favor and one testifier expressing strong frustration about Native Hawaiian rights and access to resources. The chair noted there were 38 additional written/supporting testimonies and three in opposition. Members asked about OHA’s funding sources and public land trust revenues; OHA said it is not receiving the full 20 percent share, described a public land trust working group and system issues, and said a related bill would seek funding to begin an inventory. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then considered House Bill 304, which would make the Hawaiian version of a law binding when the law was originally drafted in Hawaiian and later translated into English. The Judiciary supported the bill, saying it reinforces Hawaiian as an official language and looks to the original language for legislative intent. The Attorney General supported the intent but recommended narrowing the bill with a proviso to avoid ambiguities, limiting it to laws originally drafted in Hawaiian that were not later amended, codified, recodified, or reenacted in English. Public testimony was generally supportive, though one speaker raised broader sovereignty concerns. Members questioned how many laws would be affected and whether the proposed amendment would undercut the bill; the Attorney General said the amendment was meant to address uncertainty in interpretation. No final action was reported. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 603, which would direct OHA to administer a Native Hawaiian business marketing program to promote Native Hawaiian-owned businesses through marketing and technical assistance. OHA supported the concept, saying a label or branding program could help consumers identify and support Native Hawaiian-owned businesses, but requested that funding be redirected to a working group to study program design, implementation, enforcement, and long-term viability. The chair noted four supportive testimonies had been received, and a member asked OHA to confirm that its programs serve all Hawaiians, not only those eligible for homelands; OHA said it serves all Hawaiians in the state. The transcript ends before any vote or further action on HB 603.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll just add, as was just mentioned by DHHL Chair, that it would be lost revenue for us.
• properties are located around where dhhl properties are located around the<00:07:16.360> island
• chair that um it would be lost lost dhhl chair that um it would be lost lost revenue<00:11:13.200>
• DHHL, please. Thank you, Chair.
• General obligation ation bonds dhhl General obligation ation bonds dhhl shall<00:47:59.200> conduct

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing focused primarily on Senate Bill 1409, which would cap county user fees charged to Department of Hawaiian Home Lands beneficiaries. Department of Hawaiian Home Lands supported the measure, arguing it would reduce monthly housing-related costs for lower-income beneficiaries and help make homesteading more affordable. Several testifiers, including the Tax Foundation of Hawaii and some individuals, also submitted comments or support. County and city water and sewer agencies, including the County of Kauai Department of Water, the City and County of Honolulu Department of Facility Maintenance, the Honolulu Board of Water Supply, and the City and County Department of Environmental Services, strongly opposed the bill, saying it would shift substantial costs to other ratepayers, create lost revenue, and could force fee increases for everyone else. They also raised concerns about the bill’s cap structure and potential misuse, while noting their systems are funded by user fees rather than taxes. During committee discussion, Honolulu Board of Water Supply officials estimated about 4,500 DHHL customers on Oʻahu and projected lost revenue of roughly $30 million to $36 million over five years, with larger cumulative impacts over time; they said any waiver would be absorbed by other customers. The County of Hawaiʻi representative estimated nearly 2,000 DHHL customers on the Big Island and about $2.4 million in annual lost revenue. DHHL responded that it is pursuing revenue-generating projects on unused lands, but members questioned whether the department should do more to generate its own revenue and suggested looking at other affordability mechanisms, including market rent on commercial properties or a similar cap on other beneficiary fees. After hearing the testimony and discussion, the committee chair announced the recommendation to defer SB 1409 indefinitely, and the Committee on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs agreed with that decision. The hearing then moved to Senate Bill 1408, a housekeeping measure. DHHL testified in support, saying the bill was part of an effort to lower housing costs through a modular manufacturing approach. DHHL described plans to use an unused hangar at Kalaeloa for a potential modular housing manufacturing plant, including discussions with the University of Hawaiʻi and a Denver-based company, and said it was also exploring a pilot project with Habitat for Humanity on Maui. No vote or final action on SB 1408 was taken in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Okay, next we have DHHL in support. >> Bless you.
• you're talking about, which DHHL you're talking about, which DHHL probably<00:52:54.960> knows
• <00:52:59.920> receives program than others, but DHHL receives program than others, but DHHL
• But I would prefer supporting DHHL on that first, because if DHHL has the subject matter experts, their
• on that first because if supporting DHHL on that first because if DHHL<00:57:24.000> has<00:57

Bills: HB1527, HB1823, HB2490, HB2223, HB2325, HB2104, HB2593, HB2592, HB1927, HB1553, HB1964, HB1918, HB1990

Keywords: gambling prohibition, Aloha Stadium, University of Hawaii, amateur athletics, state lands, coastal resilience, Maui, Mantokuji Bay, coastal erosion, environmental protection, Native Hawaiian, spiritual sites, historic preservation, economic development, burial sites, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, cultural history, archaeology, Hawaii Revised Statutes, civil service

Summary: The committee first heard HB 1527 relating to gambling. The chair outlined hearing rules, including a two-minute limit and a warning that bills not heard would die. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support from a prosecutor, Honolulu Police Department, and Stop Predatory Gambling, all arguing that casinos and sports betting increase crime, sex trafficking, harassment of athletes, and broader social harm. No opposition testimony was presented, and the committee moved on without questions or action taken on the bill. The committee then heard HB 1823 relating to coastal zone management and HB 2490 relating to coastal resilience. For HB 1823, DLNR, the Office of Planning, and Maui County testified, with Maui County supporting the measure and its proposed amendments. For HB 2490, DLNR expressed concern about exempting a proposed Mokuji Bay pilot project from permits and regulation before a long-term plan is finalized, while the County of Maui, the Mokuji Soto Zen Mission, and the Office of Planning supported the bill as a coastal resilience pilot. The mission described severe erosion, sea-level rise impacts, and years of unsuccessful efforts to stabilize the shoreline; its consultant said the study is leaning toward nature-based and hybrid solutions. In questioning, members and DLNR discussed whether the bill should say the project “shall” or “may” be exempt, and the chair indicated the language would be adjusted to preserve DLNR discretion and to change the lead agency reference to OPSD. No vote was taken in the transcript. Finally, the committee took up HB 2223 relating to historic preservation reviews. SHPD said it stood on its written comments, while OPSD and DHHL supported the bill. DHHL argued the measure would streamline reviews, improve transparency, and help address long wait times for its projects, saying it could alleviate burden on SHPD and better serve beneficiaries. Representative Shimizu questioned whether the bill would create redundancy and expand government rather than strengthen SHPD, noting a separate staffing bill already exists. SHPD responded that DHHL is uniquely subject to 6E review and that the bill would not waive federal or state historic review requirements; the discussion also touched on possible federal-style grant support and the existing memorandum of agreement between SHPD and DHHL. The transcript ends during questioning, with no final committee action shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is an idea to have DHHL use it as a modular to construct modular homes. that particular parcel
• No formal process that DHHL has submitted yet, and I'm sure that it would involve because it's part of
• <00:25:50.480> has um no formal uh process that dhhl has um no formal uh process that dhhl
• You have a neighbor; is DHHL your neighbor as well?
• <00:42:24.640> LS going to probably I know for dhhl LS going to probably I know for dhhl LS

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land opened with housekeeping remarks about testimony limits, video availability, and that decision-making would follow the hearing. The committee then heard and considered several SCRs authorizing long-term nonexclusive easements over state submerged lands for existing public or private infrastructure on Oahu, including stormwater outfalls, shoreline protection structures, concrete stairs, seawalls, and a rock revetment. DLNR supported each measure and generally requested only technical or clarifying amendments; for SCR 3, DLNR asked that the title be clarified to specify the easement would be granted to the City and County of Honolulu. After discussion, the committee adopted the chair’s recommendations, passing SCR 3 with amendments and SCRs 4, 6, and 7 unamended, while SCR 5 was passed with technical, non-substantive amendments. Senator Meli noted general concerns about seawalls and hardening but said he would support the measures because they involved repair of existing structures and public access, though he indicated a reservation on SCR 6. The committee then took up governor’s messages for HCDA appointments. For GM 58, Gerald Gordner was nominated to the Kalaeloa district seat; HCDA’s executive director and another supporter praised his urban planning, housing, zoning, GIS, and collaborative skills, and Gordner described his interim service and background in housing affordability and disaster recovery. Members also discussed a former military hangar in Kalaeloa and possible future uses, with Gordner noting he understood there had been restrictions that were later lifted, while the chair raised concerns about airport operations and modular housing use. The committee also heard support for GM 559, nominating Micki Lidstone as cultural specialist; HCDA said she had been an active and reliable board participant and cultural resource, and Lidstone said she valued learning from Native Hawaiian testimony and helping balance community perspectives. Finally, GM 688 nominated Deborah Kabibi to the Leeward Oahu/Maui district seat; HCDA said her community ties would be valuable for South Maui planning, and Kabibi said she had learned a lot from the board’s collaborative process and was eager to represent her community. The transcript ends during discussion of GM 688, before any vote on the nominations is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, we have DHHL with comments. Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee.
• <00:55:40.400> thinks<00:55:41.079> that if dhhl thinks that if dhhl thinks that um
• <00:56:24.680> to uh I don't think that's for dhhl to uh I don't think that's for dhhl to
• The concern of the standards being kept by DHHL. Anyone else voting with reservations?
• The concern of the standards being kept by DHHL. Anyone else voting with reservations?

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Water and Land met on February 13, 2025, and heard testimony on a series of housing, land, and resource bills. Early bills included HB 743 on fiscal sustainability, HB 1318 on affordable housing, and HB 1409 on the Transit-Oriented Development Infrastructure Improvement District Board. Testimony on the housing measures was largely supportive from agencies and advocacy groups such as the Office of Planning, Hawaii Housing Future, Hawaii Appleseed, Catholic Charities, and the County of Kauai, while the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) raised concerns on HB 1318 about public trust duties for ceded lands. On HB 1409, members questioned whether the bill needed updating in light of a separate bill changing the board structure, and witnesses said the measure did not change funding but only the board’s mission and scope. The committee also heard HB 1410, which would create a supportive housing special fund. Supporters, including Catholic Charities, the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities, and Hawaii Appleseed, argued that predictable dedicated funding is needed for supportive housing, social services, and long-term homelessness solutions. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii opposed tax earmarks in general, saying they subvert the constitutional budgeting process. Members asked how the fund would be administered and who could access it; witnesses said HHFDC and the counties would coordinate the process, but DLNR noted the bill did not provide additional administrative capacity and suggested language to address that. Later bills included HB 528 on residential leaseholds, HB 1359 on flood mitigation, HB 1087 on historic preservation reviews, HB 868 on disabilities, and HB 1323 on transfer of non-agricultural park lands. HB 528 drew limited testimony, with a Catholic Charities/Hawaii Public Housing Authority representative offering a general example of leasehold development but saying the bill’s exemptions had not been discussed in detail. HB 1359 prompted discussion of homeowner and county responsibilities for drainage and flood damage, with DLNR saying private owners are responsible for drainage on private property and counties for county roads. HB 1087 was supported by DHHL, which said historic preservation reviews currently take about 165 days and the bill could improve timeliness, while Hawaii Historic Hawaii Foundation opposed it. HB 868 drew support from the Disability Rights Center and DCAB, with testimony focusing on beach access and the need for clearer legal authority. On HB 1323, DLNR opposed the bill, saying it did not reflect Act 90 and that some agricultural parcels should remain under DLNR for conservation, watershed, recreation, or fire protection reasons; DOA, Hawaii Farm Bureau, and Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council supported the measure, arguing that productive agricultural lands should be transferred to agriculture to protect local food production and family ranches.

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe DHHL should be focused on providing living units for their constituents, the Native Hawaiian
• should be focused money I believe dhhl should be focused on<00:46:26.480> Prov<00:46:27.280><
• land, that DHHL is the appropriate entity to do that.
• Representative Lowen continued that DHHL is the appropriate entity to do that, and that there is work
• <00:49:49.920> has confusion because I believe dhhl has confusion because I believe dhhl has

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Holly Watson from DHHL has... the committee. I'm Jessica Simon with the committee.
• <00:01:04.960> Holly<00:01:05.280> Watson<00:01:05.760> from<00:01:06.200> DHHL
• Um, depending on the land it’s located on, is it DLNR land, is it private, is it DHHL?
• Depending on the land it’s located on, is it DLNR land, is it private, is it DHHL?
• Um, depending on the land it’s located on, is it DLNR land, is it private, is it DHHL?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs heard HCR 58 HD1, which asks the Hawaii State Energy Office to convene a geothermal energy working group to review the regulatory and policy landscape for geothermal development in Hawaii. Testimony was generally supportive: the PUC, Consumer Advocates Office, and State Energy Office all said they stood on written testimony in support. In response to questions, a State Energy Office representative explained that geothermal exploration and permitting involve multiple agencies and depend on the land involved, and estimated that drilling an initial slim-hole test well could cost around $2.5 million or more, with additional work needed afterward to characterize the resource. The representative also noted that drilling can provide useful information about groundwater, geology, and temperature profiles. The committee discussed the importance of including community members and relevant energy stakeholders in the working group. After discussion, the committee voted to recommend HCR 58 HD1 be passed unamended. The chair, vice chair, and Senator Richards voted yes, Senator Fevella was excused, and the recommendation was adopted. Later in the same meeting, the committee heard HCR 68, which urges the City and County of Honolulu to create a dedicated animal education and training complex in the Kalai Loa Parklands, and HCR 72, which urges county ethics commissions to adopt standards similar to those applied to state elected officials and officers. Pacific Pet Alliance testified in support of HCR 68, citing the lack of animal-friendly facilities on the Leeward side and the high cost of renting space for shows and related events. No one testified on HCR 72. The committee then voted to pass both resolutions unamended, with Senator Fevella excused, and both recommendations were adopted before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are going after federal funds, you know, maintenance, whether it's Bishop, state, or DLNR or DHHL,
• We just had DHHL in here; they are not building on a 90-acre lot in M...
• Follow up on that: we just had a briefing with DHHL.
• um we just had um a briefing with dhhl um we just had um a briefing with dhhl have<02:16:51.160>
• team right now that is meeting with dhhl team right now that is meeting with dhhl and<02:18:57.120

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint Ways and Means and Hawaiian Affairs committee heard a budget presentation from the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands on its biennium requests for critical projects, repairs and maintenance, and operations. DHHL described its role in administering the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, noted the large beneficiary wait list, and said prior funding, including Act 279, has helped the department accelerate land development and reduce vacancies. Officials said they have about 47,219 applications involving 29,548 Native Hawaiians, roughly 28 projects underway, and that about $471 million of a $600 million appropriation has been encumbered, with the remaining lapse-fix funds expected to be resolved before the June 30, 2026 deadline. DHHL emphasized that its current request would support additional lot development and could help produce roughly 6,000 units from the existing project pipeline, with another phase of requests potentially adding about 2,000 more units. The department said it is prioritizing shovel-ready projects, accelerating lease awards and orientations, and using a mix of approaches including paper leases, rental-with-option-to-purchase, owner-builder, and loan programs. Officials also discussed a shift toward denser urban development, citing projects in West Oahu and Honolulu, and said the department is working to reduce its vacancy rate and move beneficiaries onto the land more quickly. Members questioned why Oahu, despite having the largest wait list, was receiving comparatively lower amounts, and DHHL responded that land availability and cost drive those decisions, with Oahu having limited developable land and very high acquisition costs. The department pointed to land acquisition on Kauai and other islands, and to urban high-rise projects that can yield far more units on small parcels. Members also raised long-term maintenance and wildfire risk, asking whether current acquisition and development choices account for future infrastructure costs; DHHL said maintenance is a growing concern, especially on large unused or isolated lands, and that it is pursuing Firewise planning, federal funds, and partnerships to reduce risk. The discussion also touched on mixed-use and community-led development, with DHHL explaining that it leases land to nonprofit homestead associations under general leases with milestones, business-plan requirements, and land-use restrictions to support local services and community goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today's resolution from DHHL will help us complete that mandate.
• Today's resolution from DHHL will help us complete that mandate.
• Today's resolution from DHHL will help us complete that mandate.
• Today's resolution from DHHL will help us complete that mandate.
• fulfilling the mandate not just at DHHL fulfilling the mandate not just at DHHL and<01:24:46.480

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Act 279 working group met for an informational briefing with DHHL on its use of the $600 million appropriation and progress on the department’s implementation plan. The chair reviewed the working group’s oversight role, noting that it was created to monitor expenditures, project development, and progress toward reducing the Hawaiian Homes waitlist, and that the group must submit a progress report before the 2026 session and a final report before the 2027 session. DHHL said it had provided an updated booklet reflecting the Hawaiian Homes Commission’s February 2024 recommendations and a detailed accounting of encumbrances and project progress across the islands. DHHL highlighted several implementation themes: innovative financing and construction methods, land acquisitions and exchanges, technology, beneficiary services, and partnerships with counties and private entities. The department described a “project lease” model that gives beneficiaries access to a project rather than a specific lot, with options such as turnkey homes, owner-builder, self-help, or rent-to-purchase arrangements depending on financial qualification. Officials said this approach is intended to serve lower-income beneficiaries, expand access for people on the waitlist, and allow beneficiaries to receive support services such as financial literacy and down payment assistance. The department reported that roughly $511 million had been encumbered for infrastructure, about $152.8 million for acquisitions, financing, and beneficiary services, and about $36 million in other covered costs, with about $588.9 million encumbered as of December 31 and about $120 million expected to be spent by that date. Officials said the original implementation plan covered about 2,722 units, while the updated plan projects roughly 6,000 to 7,000 leases and 2,472 lots to be occupied. They also described phase-two needs for additional funding, including projects on Hawaiʻi, Maui, Kauaʻi, and Oʻahu, and said they would need continued legislative support, including possible bonding and private activity bond set-asides, to complete remaining projects. Members discussed the distinction between encumbered and spent funds, and DHHL explained that encumbrances reserve money for specific contracts while construction spending occurs over time through progress payments. The department also showcased examples of innovative projects, including a high-rise project in urban Honolulu financed through a mix of private activity bonds, tax credits, and state funds, and an acquisition-based project in Kapaʻa, Kauaʻi using multiple funding sources. DHHL emphasized partnerships with the City and County of Honolulu and Maui County, and said it is still assessing future projects to keep infrastructure costs manageable and ensure homes are safe and affordable for beneficiaries.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then you have the DHHL in highways.
• <01:14:37.760> can upgrades, or reforming, the DHHL can upgrades, or reforming, the DHHL can
• roadways, cross paths more with DHHL roadways, cross paths more with DHHL than<01:14:54.160>
• <01:15:17.480> that's project or parcel exists for DHHL that's project or parcel exists for
• DHHL that's identifying<01:15:18.240> to<01:15:18.360> do<01:15:18.440> the<01:

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Transportation Committee met on March 31 and heard a series of resolutions focused on roadway safety, transportation access, and infrastructure coordination. Early measures included HCR 104/HR 96 on advancing coastal trails on O‘ahu’s North Shore and HCR 63/HR 57 on clarifying responsibility for Honouliuli Bridge and addressing safety, wildfire, and emergency access concerns. The Department of Transportation supported both, and a resident testified that the Honouliuli bridge is a single-lane emergency replacement on state land that has limited access for fire protection, heavy vehicles, permits, and repairs. DOT said it was working with DLNR and that jurisdiction may ultimately lie with the County of Maui, with research ongoing. The committee also heard HCR 62/HR 56 on alternative vegetation management along Hana Highway, HCR 43/HR 39 on raised crosswalks near Ala Wai Elementary, and HCR 52/HR 48 on integrating the safe system approach into county road design; these drew support testimony and no opposition. The committee then considered HCR 120/HR 112 on regulating transportation network companies under motor carrier law. DOT and the Public Utilities Commission offered comments, while Lyft opposed, arguing the legislature already created a TNC-specific framework in 2022 and that motor carrier law is not a good fit for app-based ride platforms. In questioning, PUC explained that TNCs would fall under both PUC motor carrier jurisdiction and DOT permitting, and DOT said it would follow up on enforcement questions. Members also discussed HCR 119/HR 111 on an indirect traffic disruption grant program, with the chair asking DOT to clarify how it enforces penalties when contractors or others fail to follow road closure requirements. Other measures discussed included HCR 96/HR 88 on moving to a demerit-point driver licensing system, which DOT supported; HCR 128/HR 120 on coordinating capital improvement planning for Hawaiian Home Lands developments, which DOT and DHHL supported; HCR 127/HR 119 on a state highway police force, which DOT supported; and HCR 125/HR 117 on a statewide plan for derelict utility poles and lines, which drew support from DOT, Hawaiian Electric, and Hawaiian Telcom, with DOT acknowledging it lacks current statutory authority to force immediate removal. The committee also heard HCR 58/HR 54 on school crosswalk safety for Mililani Elementary, HCR 55/HR 51 on using artificial intelligence to mitigate traffic and improve road safety, and HCR 54/HR 146 on expanding the Hele-On Shared Ride program on Hawai‘i Island. Supporters of the Hele-On measure said expanded service would help rural residents, kupuna, and people with disabilities reach medical appointments and daily activities, while noting cost and technology-access concerns; they said missed or delayed appointments are a real issue in remote areas. The final item discussed in the excerpt was HCR 64/HR 58 on minimizing rumble strip dimensions on Kūhiō Highway on Moloka‘i, with DOT saying it had already removed some strips where large emergency vehicles were affected on narrow curves.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, for DHHL, please. Thank you for being here.
• <00:18:48.880> Okay,<00:18:49.440> thank Yeah, for DHHL. Thanks for being here.
• Just really curious how much OHA is partnering with DHHL as far as touching the ... ...with DHHL as far
• I'm Representative for DHHL.
• I'm Representative for DHHL.

Bills: SCR63, SCR8, SCR160, SCR90, SCR93

Keywords: disability, accessibility, healthcare communication, sign language interpreters, deaf, hard of hearing, deaf-blind, auxiliary aids, building permits, seniors, health care, safety modifications, county regulations, expedited processing, housing ladder, move-up housing, subsidized housing, public housing, affordable housing, housing mobility

Summary: The House Committee on Human Services and Homelessness heard several resolutions focused on disability access, housing, and support for Native Hawaiian beneficiaries. SCR 63 SD1 would have the Disability and Communication Access Board study communication needs in health care settings for people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or deaf-blind and revise provider guidance; testimony was strongly supportive, including from the board, a physician, and a family member who described harmful delays in care, and the committee later recommended passage as is. SCR 8 would require counties to act within 45 days on completed permit applications for home modifications needed for an older adult or person with a disability; testimony noted delays in permitting and financing, and the committee recommended passage as is. The committee also heard SCR 160, which urges state housing agencies to create a “housing ladder” program to help individuals and families move from subsidized to unsubsidized housing. Hawaii Public Housing Authority and other agencies supported the concept, and DHS described its family self-sufficiency program and said prior federal resident-services funding had declined over the past 20 years. The committee acknowledged the program may already exist in some form but still recommended adoption of the resolution as is. SCR 90 would ask county planning departments to establish kupuna-friendly building permit requirements for parking accessibility in private businesses. The committee moved it forward with an HD1 for technical amendments; a member raised concern that the measure did not specify the age threshold for “kupuna,” and said they would vote with reservations. Finally, SCR 93 would direct DHHL and the Statewide Office of Homelessness and Housing Solutions to develop a coordinated support and stabilization pathway for Native Hawaiian beneficiaries experiencing homelessness or very low income. DHHL said it is already operating a transitional housing effort called Ka Leo Opu Mama for about 18 beneficiaries using more than $6 million in federal Nah Ho Sa funds, with no dedicated state funding, and the committee recommended passage as is. The meeting ended with the chair thanking testifiers and members and adjourning the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the first residential DHHL project on Maui in nearly two decades, which, when completed, will
• $600 million to dhhl to reduce its<00:24:36.919> decades<00:24:37.399> long<00:24:37.640
• /c><00:24:45.000> embarked<00:24:45.360> on<00:24:45.440> a kakali since then dhhl
• has embarked on a kakali since then dhhl has embarked on a bold<00:24:45.840> Five-Year<00:24
• project on Maui in nearly two dhhl project on Maui in nearly two decades<00:25:04.960> which<

Keywords: House Agenda:, 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair Colie Watson, DHHL, in support.
• Vice Chair, for the housing testimony, Gary Suganuma, DHHL, with comments.
• DHHL, in support. Yes, aloha.
• Next we got Chair Kly Watson, DHHL, in support.
• <00:27:02.520> in dhhl in dhhl in support<00:27:04.520> aloh<00:27:05.520> Katie

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Housing held a public hearing and moved quickly through a long agenda, beginning with HB 606 on the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. DHHL and several community testifiers strongly supported the bill, describing it as a way to fulfill long-standing promises to Native Hawaiians, reduce the DHHL waitlist, keep families in Hawaii, and support housing production and the broader economy. Testifiers emphasized the cultural and economic importance of stable housing and noted the large number of people still waiting for DHHL homes. The committee then heard HB 1086, also relating to DHHL, which would allow the department to use a $75 million appropriation from the dwelling unit revolving fund as collateral for loans. DHHL, HHFDC, and other supporters said the measure would help DHHL obtain better loan terms and preserve trust funds for other uses. Members asked detailed questions about how the collateral would work, whether other agencies use similar structures, and what would happen if the collateral were drawn upon; staff explained that the funds would be encumbered for the loan and that a similar model had been used for a HUD-backed project. The committee also heard HB 739, which would create the COM homes program to fund counties to buy voluntary deed restrictions from eligible homeowners or buyers. Supporters said the program could help keep local workers in Hawaii by using existing housing stock and cited examples from places like Aspen and Vail. The Attorney General’s office recommended amendments to remove duration requirements to avoid right-to-travel concerns, and the Tax Foundation suggested clarifying the conveyance tax exemption so it also covers the instrument imposing the restriction. Members asked whether tax dollars would be used to buy homes, who would be eligible, and how enforcement would work; supporters said the program is voluntary and income-blind, with restrictions tied to living and working in the state. No votes were taken during the hearing.