Transcript Highlights:

• It requires DAB to promote partnerships with Native Hawaiian practitioners, cooperatives, and in-based
• So, it seems like this is something that industry can explode to allow Native Hawaiians to be at the
• organizations as opposed to non-Native Hawaiian organizations?
• licensing to come in from Native licensing to come in from Native Hawaiian<00:15:55.680> organizations
• as opposed to Hawaiian organizations as opposed to non-native<00:15:57.279> Hawaiian<00:15:57.680

Bills: SB2178

Keywords: industrial hemp, Hawaii, agriculture, sustainability, Native Hawaiian practices, regulation, cultural stewardship, economic development, 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SP 2178, which would create an industrial hemp program in the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, establish an advisory board, support research through the University of Hawaii, and promote hemp-based materials and partnerships with Native Hawaiian practitioners and cooperatives. Testimony was generally supportive from industry, Native Hawaiian advocates, the Hawaii Farm Bureau, and the department, with supporters emphasizing economic opportunity, community-based development, and potential uses such as hempcrete and fiber products. The Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity also said it supported the intent, but its representative explained that the bill would require additional staffing and resources for education, monitoring, testing, and enforcement. Members raised concerns about overlapping regulation with USDA hemp licensing and the cost of new positions; the department estimated three additional positions at about $80,000 each and noted current federal licensing does not charge fees. The committee recommended passage with amendments, including removing state licensing requirements to avoid duplication with USDA authority, making technical changes, and blanking the appropriation amount for later consideration, and the recommendation was adopted unanimously. The committee also heard and later took action on several other measures. SB 2702, relating to Hawaiian Homes and an irrigation system inventory, drew support but was postponed for decision-making until February 5 so additional amendments could be prepared. SB 2785, relating to economic development, received mixed testimony but was recommended and adopted for passage without amendments. SB 2790, relating to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and the Mākai irrigation system, received strong support and was also passed unamended. SB 2314, relating to the Hawaiian language and the legal effect of Hawaiian versions of laws, drew support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission and others, while the Attorney General’s office raised concerns about the wording; the committee adopted amendments incorporating language from the judiciary, clarifying that English and Hawaiian are official languages and that priority goes to the version consistent with legislative intent when there is a material difference, and then passed the bill with amendments. All final votes reported were in favor, with no recorded opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• The state carries a fiduciary duty to protect Native Hawaiian burial sites with the highest standard
• Well, that's the same model for Native Hawaiian worldview. And I believe that we can perpetuate...
• This includes Native Hawaiians who work as fishermen catching aquarium fish.
• <01:14:41.040> work<01:14:41.199> as for Native Hawaiians who work as for Native Hawaiians
• The Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights Association. We're in opposition to this bill.

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:

• Hawaiian oysters and clams.
• Hawaiian oysters and clams.
• Hawaiian oysters and clams.
• And it prioritizes<00:36:10.320> Native<00:36:10.640> Hawaiian prioritizes Native Hawaiian
• prioritizes Native Hawaiian practitioners<00:36:11.839> and<00:36:12.079> small-cale<00

Bills: SB2350, SB2349, SB2407, SB3320

Keywords: agriculture, aquaculture, livestock, agribusiness, Department of Agriculture, regulatory functions, employee benefits, restorative practices, sustainability, environmental stewardship, local food systems, Native Hawaiian, workforce development, agricultural development, Hawaii Island, property manager, state employment, SB3320, Hawaii, Agribusiness Development Corporation

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SP 2350, which would transfer oversight of the Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Development Division and the aquaculture and livestock support services branch to the Agribusiness Development Corporation. The Department of Agriculture and ADC both testified, with ADC opposing the bill as written while supporting the goal of strengthening agriculture. ADC said the transfer could create federal operational and coordination risks, jeopardize federal funding and program continuity, and was unnecessary because ADC is a business development entity, not a regulatory agency. The Hawaii Farmers Union also expressed concern that moving the programs could weaken the department’s ability to access federal resources, while the Hawaii Farm Bureau submitted written testimony and the Hawaii Aquaculture and Aquaponics Association and H-Plan were noted as supporting the measure; the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council was noted as opposing it. Much of the discussion focused on aquaculture’s economic potential and the role of regulation, permitting, and funding. Committee members questioned why aquaculture had not grown faster, citing current gross revenues of about $66 million last year, a prior high of $82 million, and a possible long-term target of $500 million. Testimony identified permitting and feed costs as major barriers, along with market conditions and water quality issues affecting producers. ADC described ongoing efforts on feed development, permitting streamlining, coastal-state collaboration on seaweed and restorative aquaculture, and national advocacy for more parity in seafood import standards. Members also pressed the Department of Agriculture on its leadership and priorities, criticizing the lack of bills and resources dedicated to aquaculture and asking whether the department should have more authority to pursue land purchases and development opportunities. The department said it relies on divisions and industry feedback for bill ideas, noted it funds an annual aquaculture survey, and said it was pursuing congressional earmarks and other funding for aquaculture parks, research, and export/import issues. ADC said it would work with the department if the bill passed, but that its current statute does not give it regulatory authority and any such change would require a statutory amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the Committee on Hawaiian Affairs.

Bills: SB2702

Keywords: Hawaiian Home Lands, property tax sales, native Hawaiian beneficiaries, housing development, right of first refusal, 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Hawaiian Affairs met on Thursday, February 5th for a decision-making-only session. The chair stated that there was one bill on the agenda, but the committee was not yet ready to make a decision or take a vote on it. As a result, the committee deferred the bill to Tuesday, February 10th at 10:01 p.m. No testimony, discussion on the bill’s substance, or votes were taken during this meeting. The meeting was then adjourned.

Bills: HR213, SB2607, SB2043, SB2396, SB2835

Keywords: Hawaiian Council, Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Native Hawaiian, Native Hawaiian community, Native Hawaiian advocacy, recognition resolution, ceremonial resolution, nonprofit, community development, economic development, cultural preservation, self-sufficiency, housing counseling, community development financial institution, CDFI, small business accelerator, trades academy, tourism, regenerative tourism, iwi kūpuna

Bills: HR213, SB2607, SB2043, SB2396, SB2835

Keywords: Hawaiian Council, Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Native Hawaiian, Native Hawaiian community, Native Hawaiian advocacy, recognition resolution, ceremonial resolution, nonprofit, community development, economic development, cultural preservation, self-sufficiency, housing counseling, community development financial institution, CDFI, small business accelerator, trades academy, tourism, regenerative tourism, iwi kūpuna

Transcript Highlights:

• >> And we will move on to uh Native >> And we will move on to uh Native Hawaiian<00:
• The Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights Association. >> Uh, did that...
• <00:26:17.120> Rights the Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights the Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights
• <00:31:50.320> Hawaiian very humbly um as a Native Hawaiian very humbly um as a Native Hawaiian
• MOKU within the state. 66 au pua native MOKU within the state. 66 au pua native Hawaiian<00:36:35.040

Bills: HB2101

Keywords: aquatic life, commercial aquarium purposes, Hawaii, environmental protection, sustainability, Native Hawaiian values, marine resources, 910, house, all

Summary: The joint committees on Energy and Environmental Protection and Water and Land heard testimony on House Bill 21101, which would ban or otherwise end commercial aquarium collection. Chairs opened the hearing with a short time limit for testimony and noted they would move to decision-making before the next committee meeting. The Department of Land and Natural Resources said it appreciated the bill’s intent and stood on written testimony, while the Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported the measure as part of its legislative package, citing community calls to ban the practice. Many other organizations and individuals also testified in support, including environmental, Native Hawaiian, and community groups, with arguments focused on reef protection, public trust, cultural concerns, and the view that the trade is extractive and not sustainable. Supporters repeatedly cited declines in yellow tang and other reef fish, especially on West Hawaii and Oahu, and argued that reef recovery has not occurred where collection pressure existed. Several testified that legal aquarium collection has not occurred in West Hawaii since 2017 or on Oahu since 2021, and that the state should not reopen an industry that has been effectively shut down for years. Others said the program is fiscally inefficient because permits generate little revenue compared with the cost of administering and enforcing the program, and that aquaculture or other alternatives could provide jobs without removing wild fish. Native Hawaiian speakers and civic club representatives emphasized traditional and customary practices, community stewardship, and the need to protect resources for future generations. Opposition testimony came from aquarium fishers and related advocates who argued the fishery has been shown sustainable, that the EIS process was completed, and that the bill would unfairly target one user group over another. They said the trade provides livelihoods for local families, that management is solid, and that the legislature should not ban a fishery after requiring compliance with environmental review. Some opponents also argued that fish populations have increased in recent years and that the issue reflects broader user conflict rather than science. No vote or final committee action was taken during the portion of the hearing provided; the chair continued taking testimony, including on Zoom, as time allowed.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're moving into a number of bills previously heard jointly with the Hawaiian Affairs Committee.
• <01:09:19.759> um with the Hawaiian Affairs Committee. um with the Hawaiian Affairs Committee
• And then, just for clarification, we are matching the addendums from Hawaiian Affairs. Yes.
• <01:13:44.239> Homes the chairperson of the Hawaiian Homes the chairperson of the Hawaiian
• <01:14:54.640> Affairs defective date from the Hawaiian Affairs defective date from the Hawaiian

Bills: SB2341, SB2306, SB2782, SB2161, SB17, SB2358, SB2367, SB2240, SB2547, SB2401, SB3031, SB1406, SB521, SB3247, SB1654, SB1112, SB1301, SB2443, SB2996

Keywords: historic preservation, Hawaii Revised Statutes, construction, state review, burial sites, cultural artifacts, development review, phased review, administrative fees, bureau of conveyances, land court, transaction fees, public services, cost recovery, notary public, fraud, real property, Bureau of Conveyances, title recording, property rights

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures related to hunting, trespass enforcement, conservation banking, coral reef resilience, and search and rescue. SB 2130 would require DLNR to increase the percentage of public land acreage designated for public hunting areas; DLNR offered comments, the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council expressed concern, and a Game Management Advisory Commission member urged adequate funding for both study and maintenance of any expanded hunting areas. SB 2128 would require forfeiture to the state of firearms or motor vehicles used in hunting trespass on private land; the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council supported the bill, and another signer testified without additional detail. The committee also heard SB 3053, which appropriates funds to DLNR’s Division of Aquatic Resources for mangrove removal and shoreline/stream maintenance in the Westlock and Middleock shorelines and watersheds. DLNR supported the measure and noted staff involved in mangrove removal work; no other testimony was offered. On SB 20005, which authorizes conservation banks for compensatory mitigation in habitat conservation plans and incidental take licenses, DLNR supported the bill but said a House measure, HB 1802, would place key safeguards in statute rather than administrative rules. Earthjustice opposed SB 20005 for lacking statutory safeguards and said it would support incorporating the House language, while CARES supported the bill as a modernization that could reduce permit processing time and provide more predictable costs. A lengthy discussion followed on SB 3201, which would direct DLNR to prioritize coral reef resilience and set performance targets for coral cover and herbivore biomass. DLNR said it supported the intent but wanted more flexibility because outside factors such as climate and emissions policy affect reef conditions; the Nature Conservancy shared that concern and asked for more flexible language. For the bill, For the Fishes strongly supported stronger protections and suggested adding abundance as a metric, while NOAA and DLNR discussed the difficulty of setting universal benchmarks because reef conditions vary by location. Randy Kosaki and CARES supported the bill, emphasizing coral decline and the need for measurable goals, while committee members asked about restoration projects, benchmarks, and whether the bill’s deadlines were meant to require a plan rather than immediate achievement. Finally, the committee took up SB 2937, which would create a search and rescue card program and special fund to reimburse state, county, and volunteer search-and-rescue operations. DLNR’s wildlife division said it stood on its written testimony, and the Hawaii SAR Alliance supported the concept but said Hawaii first needs a stronger search-and-rescue framework, including a state coordinator, before implementing such a program. No votes or final actions were taken on any of the measures in the portion of the meeting provided.

Bills: HR201

Keywords: congratulatory resolution, education, principal, teacher of the year, school leadership, Hawaii National Distinguished Principal, Masayuki Tokioka Award, United States Senate Youth Program, student delegates, public schools, charter schools, Hawaiʻi Department of Education, Hawaiian language immersion, Native Hawaiian education, K-12, student leadership, civic engagement, Freshman Academy, teacher recognition, principal recognition

Transcript Highlights:

• 100%, but they are trying to think through the scenarios and what it would actually look like in practice
• <00:31:54.880> and<00:31:55.279> like<00:31:55.440> in<00:31:55.760> practice
• scenarios applied and like in practice scenarios applied and like in practice what<00:31:57.039>
• there's two things you want: a water member, and you want to um point through your OHA process the Hawaiian
• , how do I say this, traditional Hawaiian land usage and knowledge of the cultural land practices. any

Bills: HB1881, HB2218, HB1956, HB2151, HB1845, HB1844, HB2103, HB2424, HB1650, HB376, HB2599, HB1861

Keywords: land use, ropeway, transportation, state regulation, government exemption, DLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Board of Land and Natural Resources, BLNR, public lands, public trust resources, community co-management, co-management agreement, community-based organization, Native Hawaiian, malama aina, ahupuaa, subsistence, cultural resources, religious practices

Summary: The committee on Water and Land met on February 10, 2026, with Chair Mark Hashem outlining strict testimony rules and noting a time constraint because of later hearings and floor session obligations. The committee then took up several bills, hearing mostly supportive testimony on HB 1881 relating to land use, HB 2218 relating to DLNR/community management, and HB 1956 relating to freshwater waves, while HB 1845 relating to the Land Use Commission drew legal concerns and opposition. HB 2151 relating to building materials had no substantive testimony presented in the excerpt, and the committee moved through it quickly. On HB 1881, testimony focused on protecting North Shore lands from overdevelopment. A supporter described the area as valuable precisely because it remains largely undeveloped, and a member asked whether the bill’s restrictions on “finculars” would affect existing or future private residential installations; the response suggested the bill was aimed at future commercial uses and that grandfathering or personal-use exceptions might be possible, but the exact wording would need legal refinement. HB 2218 received broad support from OHA, DLNR, Kua, Sierra Club, Hui Maka Aana, the Honlay Initiative, and others, who said the measure would expand community-based co-management across DLNR divisions, build on existing park partnerships, and produce real benefits such as better stewardship, safer access, local jobs, and stronger community trust. Members asked about the bill’s five-year review structure, how multiple community groups would be handled, and whether the model could apply to ocean or nearshore areas; DLNR said the board would retain authority, agreements would be non-exclusive and subject to review, and the department was still working through how the approach would function across different divisions and marine settings. For HB 1956, the Attorney General offered technical comments, urging clearer definitions of “residing” and “freshwater way,” clearer timing for citations and arrests, and more explicit procedural safeguards and agency roles. On HB 1845, the Attorney General and Land Use Commission raised concerns that the bill could conflict with constitutional protections for important agricultural lands and could not be reconciled with existing voting requirements; the LUC also said commissioners cannot vote by proxy under sunshine law and warned that the bill could allow too few commissioners to approve major boundary changes. Members questioned how the bill would work in counties without designated important agricultural lands, and the LUC explained that Kauai is the only county to have completed the IAL process, while the broader statutory process remains county-driven and has been the subject of litigation. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hawaiian rights and the environment.
• Native Hawaiian rights and processes for Native Hawaiian rights and the<00:34:07.840> environment
• The state of Hawaii and Native Hawaiians do not have the same sovereign recognition for their Section
• Do not regulate our Hawaiian culture and native rights into silence.
• Do not regulate our Hawaiian culture and native rights into silence.

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.

Bills: HR208, HR50, HCR54, HR102, HCR110, HR103, HCR111, HR114, HCR122, HR152, HCR162, HR20, HCR19, HR98, HCR106, HR49, HCR53, HR53, HCR57, HR93, HCR101, SB3225

Keywords: Boys & Girls Club of Hawaiʻi, Youth of the Year, Military Youth of the Year, House Resolution, HR 208, keiki, youth recognition, student achievement, leadership award, community service, youth development, after-school programs, teen center, military families, Oʻahu, Hawaiʻi Legislature, commendation, congratulation, positive youth development, Boys & Girls Clubs of America

Transcript Highlights:

• to HCRs 166, HR 156, requesting DLNR to identify state lands on East Oahu suitable for planting of native
• Hawaiian trees. um um if<00:23:22.480> this<00:23:22.680> resolution<00:23:23.360>
• Department of Land and Natural Resources to identify state lands in East Oahu suitable for the planting of native
• Hawaiian trees, we will do some amendments for technical, non-substantive, and needed for clarity, consistency

Bills: SB2405, HCR19, HCR63, HCR85, HCR140, HCR166, HCR82, HCR98, HCR104, HCR106, HCR141, HCR165, HR20, HR57, HR77, HR132, HR156, HR74, HR90, HR96, HR98, HR133, HR155

Keywords: agricultural workforce, housing, Hawaii, working group, zoning, land use, financial incentives, tax credits, water conservation, infrastructure, public health, March4Water, water access, sustainable resources, Honopou Bridge, emergency access, wildfire risk, public safety, structural integrity, community outreach

Summary: The Water and Land Committee met on April 7 and heard testimony on several resolutions and one bill. SB 2405 SD1 HD2, relating to agricultural workforce housing, received support from the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, HFTC, and the Hawaii Farmers Union, and the committee later recommended passage as is; one member voted with reservations citing department cost and staffing concerns. The committee also heard HCR 19/HR 20 designating March as March for Water Month, HCR 63/HR 57 urging DLNR and DOT to clarify jurisdiction over Honouliuli Bridge, HCR 85/HR 77 on transferring parcels for the East Kapolei TOD project, HCR 140/HR 132 on vegetation management and fuel reduction in West Maui, HCR 166/HR 156 on identifying East Oahu lands for native Hawaiian tree planting, HCR 82/HR 74 on basic shelter standards for rapid deployment housing, HCR 98/HR 90 on a Honolulu housing pattern book, HCR 104/HR 96 on North Shore coastal trails, HCR 106/HR 98 on endorsing Waikiki as a world surfing reserve, HCR 141/HR 133 on Maui fire code enforcement, and HCR 165/HR 155 on permanent pickleball nets and lighting at Kamiloiki Community Park. Testimony was generally supportive on most measures, with several agencies and organizations submitting written comments or appearing in support. HCR 82/HR 74 drew the most discussion: the State Council on Developmental Disabilities supported the intent but asked that accessibility be considered on the front end, while another testifier opposed the resolution, arguing it could turn temporary emergency shelters into permanent substandard housing and should be deferred. Committee members discussed temporary versus permanent housing standards and accessibility, and the chair later said the measure would be amended to require permanent units to meet appropriate code standards and to note accessibility concerns in the committee report. On HCR 140/HR 132, DLNR testified that firebreak maintenance on its Waianae lands would be costly, and members noted funding and staffing implications. At the end of the meeting, the committee adopted the chair’s recommendations on the measures it voted on. SB 2405 was passed with a reservation from one member; HCR 19/HR 20, HCR 63/HR 57, HCR 85/HR 77, HCR 98/HR 90, HCR 104/HR 96, HCR 106/HR 98, HCR 141/HR 133, and HCR 165/HR 155 were passed unamended, while HCR 140/HR 132 was passed with reservations and HCR 166/HR 156 and HCR 82/HR 74 were passed with amendments. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:38:26.640> Hawaiian trust doctrine and Native Hawaiian trust doctrine and Native Hawaiian
• This bill is grounded in the public trust and the Native Hawaiian customary stewardship concepts.
• This bill is grounded in the public trust and the Native Hawaiian customary stewardship concepts.
• practices, substance uses and Native practices, substance uses and Native Hawaiian<00:47:49.440>
• <00:52:01.760> Hawaiian county offices with Native Hawaiian county offices with Native Hawaiian

Bills: SB2489, SB2310, SB2372, SB2426, SB2334, SB2925, SB3323

Keywords: invasive species, agriculture, biosecurity, lease provisions, environment, natural resources, flood management, vegetation removal, Kainahola stream, Hawaii legislation, trees, exceptional trees, significant trees, urban forestry, arborist advisory committee, DLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, University of Hawaii, county planning, tree preservation

Summary: The committee heard several measures related to agriculture, invasive species control, trees, reef protection, and land use. SP 2489 would require Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity leases to include access, invasive-species control, and termination provisions; DAB and DLNR supported it, as did several outside groups, while the Hawaii Farm Bureau and Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council raised concerns about notice, cooperation with lessees, and placing penalties on leaseholders for preexisting infestations. The chair noted six testifiers in support, one opposed, and three with comments. SP 2310 would appropriate funds to remove overgrown vegetation from the Kohola stream. DAB supported the bill but explained that the work already completed by its contractor stopped at a DOT boundary, and that the affected parcel appears to be a DOT highway segment on ceded lands; the committee discussed whether the appropriation should instead go to DOT. SP 2372, on exceptional and significant trees, received support from DNR and Outdoor Circle, with testimony describing trees as critical infrastructure and suggesting technical amendments to committee membership and the process for recommending trees to county councils. SP 2426, which would authorize DNR to contract with private parties to maintain sunscreen dispensers at state beaches and promote mineral-based sunscreen as reef-protective, drew support from DNR and reef advocates, while another witness questioned the science behind claims about mineral versus chemical sunscreens and urged broader environmental solutions. SP 2334 would impose a land conversion fee on agricultural land converted to other uses, create a fee fund for programs including healthy soils, and require state agricultural lands to use a conservation metric. DAB offered comments, and testimony from climate and farm groups generally supported the conservation goals but questioned references to programs not yet in place and objected to language excluding solar and wind uses, with one witness urging that agri-voltaics remain allowed. SP 2925, concerning coconut trees, would recognize them as food, water, and cultural resources, require signage for landscape palms, set labeling standards, and create a tax credit for naturally managed consumable coconut trees. DAB shifted from opposition to comments, DNR supported, and testimony from cultural and subsistence advocates strongly backed the bill as a response to coconut rhinoceros beetle impacts; committee questions focused on enforcement of signage, inspection resources, and the proposed tax credit.

Transcript Highlights:

• societies and veterinarian practices. societies and veterinarian practices.
• Uh, up next on Zoom is uh Native Hawaiian Gathering Association. >> Not available on Zoom, Chair. >>
• with language regarding property having an important value to the Native Hawaiian people or to another
• c> to<01:52:04.560> another the Native Hawaiian people or to another the Native Hawaiian people
• . practices. practices.

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

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Next up we have Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights Association.
• Next up we have Native Hawaiian<00:22:38.480> Gathering<00:22:38.920> Rights<00:22:39.200
• We're recommending adding the assessment of impacts to Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices
• We're recommending adding the assessment of impacts to Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices
• And I think, uh, they have every right to be there if they oversee the assets of, uh, the native Hawaiians

Bills: SB3253, SB2401, SB3169, SB17, SB3014, SB3032, SB1432, SB2002, SB2972, SB3247

Keywords: conservation, endangered species, wildlife preservation, native birds, biodiversity, sanctuary, nonprofit, DLNR, agricultural district, land use, chapter 195D, chapter 205, chapter 42F, state funding, public purpose, habitat restoration, predator-free sanctuary, ecosystem restoration, Zealandia, wildlife refuge

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard testimony on SB 5253 SD2 relating to conservation and SB 2401 relating to regional shoreline mitigation district, with the chair emphasizing short testimony limits and the need to finish before session. On SB 5253, DLNR said it stood on its written testimony and answered questions about the bill’s proposed nonprofit endangered species sanctuary. Members asked whether existing entities or agreements, such as land trusts, private landowners, and DLNR safe harbor agreements, could accomplish similar conservation goals without creating a new entity. DLNR said similar work already exists, but it was not aware of a comparable sanctuary model in the state. A member also questioned language suggesting for-profit businesses in the sanctuary, and DLNR said the intent appeared to be sales of outreach or similar materials, though it agreed that such activities could be handled by a nonprofit. The bulk of the hearing focused on SB 2401, which would create a regional shoreline adaptation/mitigation framework. The Department of the Attorney General said it had concerns about inconsistent use of the terms “mitigation” and “adaptation,” warning of possible title-subject issues. DLNR said it was neutral on the terminology and more concerned with the substance, and noted that the bill would not waive permits; any plan would still require environmental review and applicable state and county permits. DLNR also supported OHA’s recommendation to consider impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during regional planning, and said the bill’s language on temporary shoreline protection measures could help address the gap between emergency permits and longer-term planning while avoiding a hardening-only approach. The Office of Planning supported the regional planning concept but noted it is not a regulatory agency and would need to work with DLNR and the Land Board. OHA supported the bill’s planning-based approach but recommended amendments to require assessment of impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during plan development and to clarify that environmental review would still apply at the project level. Testifiers from the Ka‘anapali Steering Committee strongly supported the bill, saying it would provide a regional framework for ongoing erosion problems while preserving full regulatory authority and normal permitting, and they proposed amendments to standardize terminology, create a limited pathway for temporary shoreline protection, and address ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Members discussed the meaning of “mitigation” versus “adaptation,” the scope of shoreline hardening, and whether the bill would help the legislature take a broader, more holistic view of shoreline decisions. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hawaiian lowercase and the Native Hawaiian uppercase, and I just wanted to confirm that this program
• Is there any discussion on possibly extending it to Native Hawaiians with a capital?
• Hawaiian lowercase and the Native Hawaiian uppercase, and I just wanted to confirm that this program
• Hawaiian lowercase and the Native Hawaiian uppercase, and I just wanted to confirm that this program
• Is there any discussion on possibly extending it to Native Hawaiians with a capital?

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.

Bills: HB2592

Keywords: Mauna Kea, MKSOA, Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority, University of Hawaii, UH, Board of Land and Natural Resources, BLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, DLNR, Hawaii Revised Statutes chapter 195H, land management, transition period, management plan, administrative rules, rulemaking, lease extension, sublease, public lands, Native Hawaiian rights, cultural stewardship

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met on several decision-making agendas and first considered HB 1696, which would lower the minimum age for commercial driving in-state from 19 to 18 and adjust qualifying criteria. The committee agreed to accept amendments, including changes suggested by the Operating Engineers Union, and voted unanimously to pass the bill with amendments. HB 2333, which would authorize airport special districts and increase penalties for certain aeronautics violations, was deferred after concerns were raised about treatment of people outside airport security perimeters. On the next agenda, the committee passed HB 1710 with technical amendments only. That bill would allow the State Historic Preservation Division to conduct phase reviews of certain private-property projects and revise concurrence deadlines. HB 1737, clarifying allowable agricultural district uses related to farm dwellings and farm employee housing, also passed with technical amendments only. HB 1823, dealing with coastal zone management and excluding certain state- or county-funded infrastructure projects in Lahaina from the definition of development, passed with amendments from the Attorney General’s office. The committee then took up HB 1897, an alternative dispute resolution measure for condominium-related disputes, including facilitated mediation, evaluative mediation, and binding arbitration. Despite noting broad opposition and a reservation from Senator Buenaventura, the committee adopted the measure and moved it forward as is. Finally, HB 2576, which streamlines background check requirements for health care facilities and workers, passed with amendments reflecting input from OHA, HAH, and DOH. The meeting concluded with notice of a later joint agenda and adjournment.

Bills: SCR173, SCR78, SCR114, SCR162, SCR48, SCR160, SCR87, SCR28, SCR74, SCR20, SCR32, SCR55, SCR69

Keywords: ticket scalping, task force, consumer protection, event accessibility, local economy, menstrual health, menstrual cycle, period education, period poverty, menstrual products, menstrual dignity, health education, sexual health curriculum, DOE, Department of Education, public schools, school health, reproductive health, puberty education, hygiene education

Transcript Highlights:

• pilot program is a pract practical pilot program is a pract practical investment<00:30:34.880>
• Hawaiian Affairs. I'm not unable to be Hawaiian Affairs.
• And I think that where we've identified a best practice, we've consistently been applying a best practice
• And I think that where we've identified a best practice, we've consistently been applying a best practice
• I think that where we've identified a best practice, we've consistently been applying a best practice

Bills: HB1877, HB2006, HB2167, HB2224, HB1626, HB1690, HB2012

Keywords: LGBTQ+ rights, commission membership, representation, youth involvement, Hawaii legislation, child well-being, financial support, expectant mothers, Hawaii Rx kids program, economic stability, youth homelessness, financial assistance, housing instability, emergency services, transitioning youth, Medicaid, pharmaceutical benefits, human services, healthcare access, public funds

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1877, which would expand the membership of the Hawaii State LGBTQ+ Commission and add a youth seat. The commission’s vice chair supported the bill, saying the commission started with eight members, has growing interest, and would benefit from an odd-numbered board and youth representation. Members asked about quorum, and the commission said it has generally met monthly with only one quorum issue in the past 18–19 months and would work with legislative leaders to have appointments ready if the bill passes. Written testimony included support from Kokopac and one individual in opposition. The committee then took up HB 2006, which would create a cash assistance program for pregnant women and mothers of babies. The Department of Human Services explained current TANF rules, including eligibility requirements, child support cooperation, and work-program participation, and said the state has recently raised benefit levels to the maximum allowed, with a family of three or four receiving a little over $900 per month. Supporters from the Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Children’s Action Network Speaks, and others argued the bill could reduce child poverty and improve maternal and child health, citing evidence from Michigan’s Rx Kids program and the temporary federal child tax credit expansion. A mother and Oahu Youth Action Board member testified from personal experience about the need for direct support during pregnancy. The committee also noted support from several organizations and about 26 individuals. The committee next heard HB 2167, which would direct the Office of Youth Services to run a pilot program providing financial assistance to homeless youth. The Office of the Public Defender, youth advocates, and several organizations supported the measure, saying even small amounts of help can prevent homelessness and help youth transition safely to adulthood. The Office of Youth Services said it supports the intent of the bill but requested clarification, and committee members discussed whether the program should be run directly or through contracted community agencies, how to set performance metrics, and how to structure the RFP and contract process. The chair indicated the committee wanted to work with the vice chair and OYS offline to refine the bill before moving forward. The committee then began discussion of HB 2224, relating to Medicaid pharmacy benefit management, with testimony generally supporting giving DHS flexibility to negotiate with PBMs.