Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, we're going to go ahead and start with Tab 2, Senate Bill 636 on beach management by Senator Leek
• management planning program.
• Pepper Uchino on behalf of Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association.
• State park unit management plans serve as the foundation for all planning, improvement, and management
• State Park unit management plans serve as the foundation for all planning, improvement, and management

Bills: S0544, S0636, S0848, S0546

Keywords: golf courses, best management practices, fertilizer regulation, Department of Agriculture, environmental protection, certification, beach management, beach erosion, beach nourishment, coastal resilience, shoreline protection, critical erosion, critically eroded beach, Florida DEP, Department of Environmental Protection, coastal flooding, compound flooding, storm surge, inlet management, coastal engineering

Summary: The Environment and Natural Resources Committee met with a quorum and took up several bills. SB 636 on beach management, by Senator Leek, would create additional pathways for counties and municipalities to obtain critically eroded beach or area of critical state concern designations, shifting the process toward a more proactive approach. Senator Smith and Senator Harrell raised concerns about local capacity and funding, and the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association said the bill was an alternative pathway but emphasized the need for more recurring funding. The bill was reported favorably. The committee then considered SB 544, which transfers the Golf Course Best Management Practices Certification Program from DEP to FDACS and establishes certification and training standards there. Senator Smith and Senator Harrell asked about environmental oversight, taxation, and whether the change would affect state park restrictions; the sponsor said it would not change tax treatment or park rules and that DEP would still handle enforcement if BMPs are not followed. The Florida Springs Council opposed the bill, arguing golf courses are not agriculture and warning of weaker protections for springs, while the Florida Golf Course Superintendent's Association supported the move as a continuity and participation measure. After adopting a technical amendment, the committee reported the bill favorably, with Senator Smith voting no. SB 848 on stormwater treatment, also by Senator Trunow, was amended to clarify the role of water quality enhancement areas while stormwater rules are still being finalized and to make public-land project review forward-looking. Resource Environmental Solutions supported the amendment and bill as providing a clearer market for water quality credits, and the Florida Home Builders Association supported the measure. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably. SB 546 by Vice Chair Mayfield would require 30-day public notice before meetings reviewing the sale or exchange of state conservation lands, including at water management districts; after a technical amendment, it received support from conservation groups and was reported favorably. The committee also received a DEP presentation on the State Park Amenities Report, which said Florida’s 175 state parks drew over 28 million visitors and generated a $3.6 billion economic impact. DEP identified nearly $759 million in needed repairs and upgrades over 10 years and $1.39 billion in contemplated new construction and development in unit management plans. No votes were taken on the presentation, and the meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• if the facultative reinsurance business managed by the underwriting manager is less than 10% of the
• if the facultative reinsurance business managed by the underwriting manager is less than 10% of the
• This is about beach management.
• Most of the time, when the state manages their lands, they just manage it.
• Most of the time, when the state manages their lands, they just manage it.

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

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

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several bills, beginning with CS/SB 796, which would create Veterinary Professional Associates as a new supervised veterinary role, expand telehealth prescription timeframes, and set training and scope limits. Supporters said it would improve access to care, lower costs, and create a career path, while opponents argued the proposal lacked a clear regulatory framework, could create liability and federal-law conflicts, and would not address the real shortage in rural large-animal practice. After debate, the committee reported the bill favorably. Members also heard and favorably reported SB 1682 on local authority over derelict and abandoned vessels, CS/SB 1028 on a commercial Citizens clearinghouse for property insurance, SB 394 on exempting certain reinsurance underwriting managers from licensing, SB 636 on beach management and erosion designations, CS/SB 546 on public notice for conservation land sales or exchanges, CS/SB 302 on Biscayne Bay nature-based solutions and related coastal resiliency provisions, SB 1050 on pharmacy choice for pet medications, and SB 774 extending workers’ compensation benefits to 911 public safety telecommunicators for mental and nervous injuries. Testimony on these bills generally focused on access, regulatory clarity, environmental protection, or workforce support, with some concerns raised on insurance consumer protections and beach-management language. Senator Harrell’s bills were also taken up and reported favorably: CS/SB 480, a major overhaul of state IT governance creating DIGIT and new procurement, reporting, and workforce structures; CS/SB 1230, restricting PFAS-containing firefighting foam and adding testing, inventory, and disposal requirements; and CS/SB 1288, a naming bill designating the Andrew Red Harris Shoal and requiring markers. Finally, the committee heard extensive testimony on SB 1066 regarding restoration of the Oklawaha/Rodman system, with supporters emphasizing ecological restoration, flood-risk reduction, and economic benefits, and opponents warning about local impacts, water quality, and the loss of a world-class fishery. The transcript ends during testimony on that bill, before final action is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• in Waikiki, which is the Kūhiō Beach in Waikiki, which is the Kūhiō Beach sector,<00:06:52.760><
• <00:07:05.280> Special we have Waikiki Beach Special we have Waikiki Beach Special Improvement
• Um restoration of the Waikiki beaches.
• But the shared guiding the beaches.
• Uh more specifically, there are beaches.

Bills: SCR159

Keywords: Waikiki, beach restoration, shoreline management, public access, environmental protection, coastal resources, tourism, economic development, traditional practices, 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > program<00:10:36.800> shall facility management lease program shall facility management
• projects in the special management area. projects in the special management area.
• . management. management.
• support beach restoration through uh the beach<01:24:40.639> restoration<01:24:41.199> fund
• Those concern public lands and coastal zone management, respectively. beaches are licensed and unlicensed

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

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Thus far, management appears to be managing to near extinction.
• Thus far, management appears to be managing to near extinction.
• c> own<00:25:53.760> natural every beach has its own natural every beach has its own natural
• And are humans a part of that beach?
• management management um<01:04:57.440> and<01:04:57.599> exempt<01:04:58.000> state

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• More specifically, ongoing replenishment, maintenance, and coordinated management to preserve the beaches
• More specifically, ongoing replenishment, maintenance, and coordinated management to preserve the beaches
• More specifically, ongoing replenishment, maintenance, and coordinated management to preserve the beaches
• The beach is not a natural beach; it was a constructed beach, an engineered beach, and the seawalls have
• The beach is not a natural beach; it was a constructed beach, an engineered beach, and the seawalls have

Bills: SCR8, SCR40, SCR83, SCR179, SCR90, SCR94, SCR159, SCR165, SCR177

Keywords: building permits, seniors, health care, disability, safety modifications, county regulations, expedited processing, environment, pollution, tourism, disposable bodyboards, polystyrene, marine ecosystems, lithium-ion batteries, environmental safety, recycling, public safety, waste management, Honolulu, Maui County

Summary: The committee heard several resolutions related to water, coastal management, and permitting. Early measures included SCR 8 on faster county action for certain home-modification permits for older adults and people with disabilities, SCR 40 on banning disposable body boards, SCR 83 on creating a lithium-ion battery disposal facility, SCR 179 on enforcing Maui fire-code provisions for brush clearance and emergency access, and SCR 90 on kupuna-friendly permit requirements. No testifiers were present for those measures, and the chair moved through them without taking votes in the portion provided. The most extensive discussion was on SCR 94, endorsing Waikiki as a world surfing reserve, and SCR 159, urging shared guiding principles for restoring and maintaining Waikiki’s beaches and shoreline. University of Hawaii testimony said the surfing-reserve designation would bring recognition, could help attract grants, and would require a stewardship committee and management plan, but would not itself block beach nourishment or shoreline restoration. Members asked about possible effects on dredging, beach nourishment, and shoreline structures; the witness said impacts on surfing were not expected to be immediate or significant. For SCR 159, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development supported the resolution but requested clarifying amendments to broaden references to law, stakeholder collaboration, and coastal science expertise. The Waikiki Beach Special Improvement District Association also supported the measure, emphasizing coordinated maintenance, public access, and the economic importance of Waikiki beaches, while noting that existing legal agreements and court decisions should be reflected in the resolution. The discussion also covered whether the state and private owners share repair and maintenance obligations for Waikiki seawalls; testimony said existing agreements remain relevant but must yield to current law. The committee also heard SCR 165 designating March as Water Month, with support from the Board of Water Supply and others, and SCR 177 requesting DAGS to convene a cooperative working group on state projects needing county permits. Mary Alice Evans said the latter would help expedite permitting, especially for housing and other state projects, and would complement efforts to standardize county permitting processes. No final votes or dispositions were announced in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• like beach nourishment and managed<00:50:57.080> retreat.
• managed retreat. managed retreat.
• Beach.
• So, this is not a pristine beach, right? So, this is not a pristine beach, right?
• on the commission of water management. on the commission of water management.

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:

• Uh, we need to preserve that beach.
• Nobody's interested in getting rid of the beach or not doing things that would preserve the beach.
• prevent houses from being on the beach. prevent houses from being on the beach.
• Um so I don't want to harden new beaches Um so I don't want to harden new beaches because<00:53:
• does the Aamoku manage um its employee? does the Aamoku manage um its employee?

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

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Department of Planning and Land Management, City and County, with comments.
• , City and County, with Management, City and County, with comments.<00:37:48.600> Didn't<00:37
• Uh, Rick Eggert, Waikiki Beach Special Improvement District Association, in support.
• 39:10.280> Egg Uh Rick Egg Uh Rick Egg Eggert,<00:39:12.200> Waikiki<00:39:12.720> Beach
• <00:39:12.960> Special Eggert, Waikiki Beach Special Eggert, Waikiki Beach Special Improvement

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:

• This clarifies that the prohibition on the taking or mining of beach or marine deposits includes sand
• allows a public petition to the Department of Land and Natural Resources for review of the integrity of beach
• It requires the department to recommend the applicable county agency to order the owner of any beach
• determined to be immediately threatened to resolve, mitigate, and plan for the harmful effects of the beach
• We're adjourned. harmful effects of the beach structure. harmful effects of the beach structure.

Bills: SB2981, SB2982, SB2983, SB2986, SB2991, SB3001, SB3010, SB3014, SB3032, SB3033

Keywords: foreign influence, campaign finance, contributions, state elections, transparency, election integrity, criminal offense, natural resources, tree protection, state property, environment, land use, boundary amendment, administrative fines, Land Use Commission, infrastructure compliance, highway safety, driver's license, administrative revocation, alcohol-related offenses

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met in decision-making only session and considered several Senate bills, generally following recommendations to pass measures with or without amendments. SB 2981 would prohibit minimum off-street parking requirements for new development in urban districts and was adopted unamended, with Senator Awa voting no. SB 2982, which bars foreign entities and foreign-influence business entities from making election-related contributions or expenditures, was adopted with an amendment adopting Attorney General language for required advertisement statements. The committee also advanced SB 2983, creating a misdemeanor offense for criminal destruction of a tree on state or county property; one member opposed it, suggesting a replanting requirement would be a better environmental remedy, but the bill was still adopted unamended. SB 2986, concerning Land Use Commission authority to amend or revise district boundary amendment decisions when conditions are not met, passed with an amendment addressing a defective effective date. SB 2991, on driver’s license revocations for certain alcohol-related offenses and re-examination requirements, passed with amendments clarifying revocation orders and re-examination procedures. Members then approved SB 3001, which regulates conversational artificial intelligence services by requiring disclosures and protocols to prevent suicidal ideation, with amendments incorporating AG and OCP recommendations, including a personal data definition and broader data minimization language. SB 3010, allowing officials and in some cases private citizens to enter unattended vehicles to protect endangered pet animals, passed with amendments. The committee also adopted SB 3014 on higher fines for taking or harassing protected turtles, SB 3032 clarifying beach and marine deposit prohibitions, and SB 3033 allowing petitions to review beach structure integrity despite a bad effective date; Senator Awa again voted no on SB 3033. The meeting adjourned after the committee noted a later joint hearing with Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so I mean management of Monaca Yeah.
• Maybe Monaca management can come up.
• It could be, but it's which groups are best managed by the SFA versus those that should be managed by
• They're managed and the ground.
• It's difficult to manage but big list.

Bills: SB2003

Keywords: Mauna Kea, land management, University of Hawaii, astronomical observatories, leasable lands, natural resource management, stewardship authority, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees on Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts and Education heard testimony and discussed SB 20003, which would require the auditor’s report under Act 255 to include a recommendation on whether the Monarch Stewardship and Oversight Authority is fit to continue managing Monaca lands. Testimony focused on the bill’s reversion language, the role of the auditor, and whether the measure gave the auditor too much discretion without clear criteria. The Office of the Auditor’s position, read into the record, was that it had strong reservations because the bill did not provide standards for assessing fitness and asked that the requirement be held or amended. Other testimony suggested a work group with relevant agencies and Hawaiian practitioners to manage the transition and reduce conflict. Committee members debated whether the bill should simply restore the original reversion language or also require an audit-based fitness determination. Several members questioned the need for a 2031 audit when Act 255 already provides for a performance and financial audit in 2031 and noted that the bill could shift authority away from the legislature. In response, the committee chair explained that the measure was intended to restore language removed during conference and to address the transition back to the University of Hawaii if the authority was not meeting the act’s purpose. The committees ultimately recommended SB 20003 be passed with amendments. The amendments would strike the auditor/audit section, add language addressing timelines by providing a 10-year lease extension and sublease extension, and make technical changes including a defective date. The committees voted to adopt the amended measure and send it forward as an SD1. The transcript also included a separate Education Committee hearing on SB 3286, which would require the University of Hawaii to develop a facilities and student housing master plan and report to the legislature. University of Hawaii testimony said the system supports the intent but that the bill’s requirements are a heavy lift across 10 campuses and should follow development of a broader academic strategy. Members raised concerns about deferred maintenance, shifting priorities, and the lack of a systemwide plan, while the university said it already has a six-year capital improvement plan but acknowledged it does not fully incorporate the broader academic and housing strategy the bill contemplates.

Transcript Highlights:

• At the Office of Management and Budget.
• The Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management, along with Elon Musk and
• at the Office of Management and Budget.
• through our Office of Federal Financial Management.
• And a lot of people don't know a lot about the Office of personnel and management and the Office of Management

Keywords: nominations, Scott Cooper, Eric Ulan, federal workforce, Office of Personnel Management, Office of Management and Budget, accountability, collective bargaining

Summary: The committee convened to discuss the nominations of Scott Cooper for Director of the Office of Personnel Management and Eric Ulan for Deputy Director at the Office of Management and Budget. This meeting highlighted the critical roles both positions play in managing the federal workforce, which comprises over two million civilian employees. Concerns were raised regarding the current administration's approach to federal employment, citing issues like mass firings and the undermining of collective bargaining rights. Members expressed the need for better accountability and transparency within the federal system, emphasizing the importance of attracting talented public servants.

Transcript Highlights:

• recovery well is for a person seeking to recover stored water within an area of impact of an active management
• water storage infrastructure, or the middle line of a drainage channel within the storage area of a managed
• USF. ...infrastructure, or the middle line of a drainage channel within the storage area of a managed
• There are some special provisions in the fifth management plan, but this is something that typically
• with the policy statement so that implementation for permit holders, applicants, and staff is more manageable

Bills: SB1202, SB1287, SB1418, SB1785, SCM1007

Keywords: groundwater, water conservation, Arizona water resources, drought management, water quality, irrigation, active management area, domestic use, stock watering, water rights, small modular reactors, energy regulation, environmental compatibility, utility construction, agricultural use, industrial users, water storage, recovery well, Arizona Revised Statutes, water management

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources, Energy and Water held a brief meeting and considered several water and energy measures. Senate Bill 1202, which would require the Arizona Department of Water Resources director to include additional information about each groundwater basin in the five-year water supply and demand assessment, was described as similar to a bill vetoed in a prior session. After a motion for a do pass recommendation, the committee approved it on a 6-3 vote with one absence. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1418, which limits county regulation of small modular nuclear reactors in certain circumstances, expands the definition of “plant” for siting purposes, and allows replacement of existing thermal units with SMRs without a new certificate of environmental compatibility in specified cases. Members noted that parts of the bill were similar to previously vetoed measures. The committee passed the bill 6-3 with one absence, with some members explaining their votes and one member saying they would support it for now but might reconsider on the floor. Senate Concurrent Memorial 1007 urged Congress to divest the Bureau of Indian Affairs of the San Carlos Irrigation Project Electric System and fund a system study and improvements. Supporters said the system is old, unreliable, and difficult for the federal government to manage, and that local public power entities could do a better job if divestiture were authorized. The memorial passed unanimously, 9-0 with one absence. Finally, Senate Bill 1785, which would codify a one-mile area-of-impact safe harbor for certain recovered stored water wells unless a separate hydrologic study is submitted, received testimony from a water attorney and an ADWR representative describing it as a codification of long-standing department policy. The committee passed SB 1785 on a do pass recommendation by a 9-3 vote with one absence.

Bills: HB 16, HB 1618, HB 2692, HB 2712, HB 2970, HB 3609, HB 3628

Keywords: water infrastructure, Texas Water Development Board, financial assistance, water supply projects, rural municipalities, water access assessment, aquifer storage, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulations, groundwater management, San Antonio River, pollution control, flood management, water quality, conservation district, bonds, utility rates, ratemaking, water services

Bills: HB 16, HB 1618, HB 2692, HB 2712, HB 2970, HB 3609, HB 3628

Keywords: water infrastructure, Texas Water Development Board, financial assistance, water supply projects, rural municipalities, water access assessment, aquifer storage, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulations, groundwater management, San Antonio River, pollution control, flood management, water quality, conservation district, bonds, utility rates, ratemaking, water services

Bills: SB 410, SB 795, SB 2510, SB 728, SB 2689, HB 143

Keywords: Gulf Coast Protection District, navigation safety, special districts, state governance, Texas legislation, Gulf Coast, flood protection, storm risk management, coastal restoration, natural resources, prescribed burns, self-insurance, fire management, liability protection, rural land management, recycling, environment, sustainability, economic development, Texas Recycling Fund

Transcript Highlights:

• causing the injection, release, or dispensation of any material within Arizona for solar radiation management
• I do not have the time, of course, to go into everything about solar radiation management.
• SCoPEx was a planned experiment in the form of geoengineering known as solar radiation management.
• In the spirit of achieving consistency with our active management areas, I vote yes.
• In the spirit of achieving consistency with our active management areas, I vote yes.

Bills: SB1005, SB1202, SB1278, SB1279, SB1280, SB1287

Keywords: cosmetics, animal testing, prohibition, manufacturers, sales regulation, state preemption, groundwater, water conservation, Arizona water resources, drought management, water quality, solar radiation management, environment, regulation, Arizona Revised Statutes, weather modification, licensing, environmental impact, public safety, cloud seeding

Summary: The Natural Resources Committee approved the minutes from January 20 and January 27, 2026, then heard several bills related to weather modification, water policy, wildlife, cosmetics, and groundwater management. SB 1278 would ban intentional solar radiation management in Arizona and bar public entities or recipients of public funds from supporting related technology development. Supporters argued it was needed to stop harmful geoengineering, while opponents said it would block research and distract from real pollution problems. The committee voted 5-2 with one not voting to give SB 1278 a do pass recommendation. The committee then considered SB 1279, which would regulate weather modification licenses, require ADWR and ADEQ review of chemicals, public notice, and public meetings, and—under a proposed strike-everything amendment—shift complaint enforcement to ADWR and require rulemaking. Testimony was largely in support from stakeholders and SRP, while ADEQ was neutral but warned it lacked standards, resources, and expertise to develop the required chemical limits on the bill’s timeline. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the bill as amended 5-2 with one not voting. Members next passed SB 1005, which would prohibit the sale of cosmetics developed with animal testing, with supporters citing cruelty concerns and industry alternatives; the bill received a do pass recommendation 4-2 with two not voting. SB 1202, requiring ADWR to include more detailed data in five-year groundwater supply-and-demand assessments, drew opposition from ADWR over feasibility, cost, and the risk of misleading conclusions, but still received a do pass recommendation 4-2 with two not voting. The committee also passed SB 1280, which would bar Game and Fish from using public funds to transport Mexican gray wolf pups into Arizona; wildlife advocates opposed it as harmful to recovery, while Game and Fish said it would not affect core responsibilities and was neutral. Finally, SB 1287, with a conforming amendment, was approved 5-1 with two not voting to extend certain irrigation grandfathered-right groundwater uses to subsequent active management areas. The committee then adjourned.

Bills: HB1, HB198, HB11, HB32, HB33, HB34, HB56, HB68, HB72, HB101, HB102, HB110, HB154, HB166, HB168, HB274, SB114, HB1, HB198, HB11, HB32, HB33, HB34, HB56, HB68, HB72, HB101, HB102, HB110, HB154, HB166, HB168, HB274, SB114

Keywords: DUI, driving under the influence, ignition interlock, interlock device, driver license suspension, restricted license, motor vehicle, alcohol offense, first offense, repeat offender, blood alcohol concentration, BAC, license revocation, Alabama State Law Enforcement Agency, ALEA, public safety, traffic safety, chemical dependency, substance abuse, court referral program

Transcript Highlights:

• If somebody is just walking on the shore, you see the beach in that video and there are fish that come
• If I go down to the beach and just pick up a fish, will they ticket me? just pick up a fish.
• Sixteen of those years, I was the man walking up and down the beach and out in the boat as a game warden

Bills: HB55, HB212

Keywords: fishing, licensing, jubilee, Marine life, Alabama, regulations, HB212, aquatic plants, public waters, state waters, waterways, water management, aquatic vegetation, weed removal, vegetation control, lake management, river management, environmental regulation, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, DCNR

Transcript Highlights:

• First up, we have testimony in opposition from Hawaii Emergency Management Agency.
• act um to their emergency management act um to allow<00:23:44.200> for<00:23:44.320> the
• We had to literally pretend we were swimming to be on the beach. Okay, thank you, ma'am.
• <00:54:16.840> Okay,<00:54:17.080> thank swimming to be on the beach.
• Okay, thank swimming to be on the beach. Okay, thank you,<00:54:17.480> ma'am.

Bills: SB2109, SB2151

Keywords: emergency preparedness, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, multilingual resources, American Sign Language, public education, community resilience, disaster response, emergency management, governor powers, legislative oversight, public safety, 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Public Safety met on March 20, 2026, and the chair opened by noting severe rain and flooding conditions in Hawaii and said the committee would proceed with the hearing but defer decision-making until the next meeting on March 25. The first measure discussed was SB 2109, an omnibus bill on emergency preparedness communications. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support, including from state agencies and advocacy groups such as the Disability and Communications Access Board, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Legal Clinic, the Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, and others. Supporters emphasized the need for funding and planning for multilingual emergency materials and language access, citing current evacuation notices that were not available in languages such as Ilokano or Tongan. The chair stated that action on SB 2109 would be deferred until March 25. The committee then heard SB 2151, relating to emergency management and changes to the governor’s emergency authority. Testimony was mixed but heavily focused on concerns about executive power. Earthjustice supported the bill with amendments, saying it should narrow extraordinary emergency powers, add definitions for emergency and disaster, preserve transparency under the Uniform Information Practices Act, and lower the legislative threshold to terminate an emergency proclamation from two-thirds to a simple majority. Other supporters, including the League of Women Voters of Hawaii and some individuals, also backed reform. Opponents, including Hawaii Emergency Management Agency and numerous individuals, argued the bill still gave the governor too much power, used overly broad disaster definitions, and did not sufficiently protect constitutional rights; several urged major amendments or repeal of portions of Chapter 127A. Some opponents specifically objected to the two-thirds termination standard and to provisions they said could enable compulsory immunizations or other mandates. Members questioned Earthjustice about whether the bill would suspend constitutional rights. Earthjustice responded that the bill would not authorize constitutional violations, but would allow suspension of laws enacted by the legislature, and pointed to existing statutory procedures for individuals to challenge emergency proclamations. The witness described a Mauna Kea case in which a three-judge panel granted relief to an individual under the current statute, and explained that the process could potentially affect a broader proclamation if allowed to run to completion. The hearing continued with additional testimony and questions, but no final vote or committee action on SB 2151 was taken during this portion of the meeting.