Transcript Highlights:

• to guide wildlife management.
• ecosystem makes no sense.
• species ecosystem, from managing forage available for the ungulates to managing the... proceeding you'll
• taking a holistic approach to the entire species ecosystem from managing forges available for the ungulates
• managing the Species ecosystem from managing forage available for the ungulates, managing the ungulates

Bills: HB2131, HB2221, HJM4009, HB2619

Keywords: sea lion, predation control, salmon preservation, fishing industry, voluntary donations, ungulate, wildlife conservation, ecosystem management, population sustainability, environmental impact, wildfire, federal response, community protection, natural resources, firefighter safety, agriculture, regulations, farming, compliance, economic impact

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2221, which would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to designate at-risk ungulate populations and trigger predator mitigation if populations in the federal delisting area fall 25% below a 10-year rolling average. The sponsor, Rep. Hunter Abel, said the bill is meant to address declining deer and elk herds in northeast Washington, support tribal and subsistence hunting, and help rural economies. Staff explained the bill’s definitions and reporting requirements, while committee questions focused on what animals count as ungulates and whether livestock are included. Public testimony was sharply divided: supporters, including some local residents, a sheriff, a county commissioner, cattle and farm groups, and a tribes representative, argued that predators are contributing to herd declines and economic harm; opponents, including WDFW, Washington Wildlife First, Sierra Club, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, and conservation groups, said the science does not support predator control as an effective way to boost ungulate populations and pointed instead to habitat, forage, weather, disease, and vehicle collisions. WDFW said parts of the bill are impractical and costly, while some supporters asked for amendments, especially on in-state wolf translocation. The hearing closed with the record showing 138 in favor, 339 opposed, and no other signed in without testifying. The committee then heard House Bill 2619, which would create a joint legislative task force to review and recommend ways to reduce regulatory stress in agriculture, including rules on land use, water stewardship, grazing, and pesticides. Rep. Tom Dent said the bill grows out of prior task force work on farm stress and suicide, and is intended to ease financial and mental health pressures on producers by reducing regulatory overload. The Washington State Department of Agriculture testified in support of the concept but noted a fiscal note and said it was working with the sponsor to reduce the cost. Farm and commodity groups also supported the bill, describing it as a practical response to stress on family farms. The committee then moved to House Joint Memorial 4009, which asks Congress to ensure federal wildfire response agencies remain capable of protecting communities, natural resources, and firefighter safety amid federal consolidation of wildfire programs. Rep. Springer and multiple tribal, county, forest industry, conservation, and public employee witnesses supported the memorial and repeatedly tied it to restoring full funding for state wildfire resilience efforts, especially House Bill 1168 funding, arguing that state and federal investments together reduce fire risk and costs. The memorial hearing ended with the record showing 181 in favor, two opposed, and no other signed in without testifying. The committee returned to House Bill 2221 for public testimony. WDFW said it supports the goal of healthy herds but raised concerns about feasibility, cost, and the bill’s harvest benchmarks. Opponents again argued that predator control is not supported by the science and that habitat and forage are the main drivers of ungulate trends. Supporters, including tribal, county, ranching, and local resident witnesses, said deer and elk declines are visible on the ground and are affecting hunting, tourism, livestock, and rural life. Several witnesses requested amendments, especially to the in-state wolf translocation language. After closing the hearing, the committee began House Bill 2131, which would add a voluntary $1-or-more donation option to vessel registrations to support sea lion predation control and salmon preservation in the Lower Columbia River. Staff explained that the account would fund pinniped management and not supplant existing funds, and noted an amendment delaying implementation from July 1 to October 1, 2026. The sponsor, Rep. Ed Orcutt, began his testimony describing sea lion impacts on Columbia River salmon and the need for the donation mechanism.

Transcript Highlights:

• have management on the land.<00:12:19.160><c> Um</c> land.
• </c> showing um the effects of well-managed showing um the effects of well-managed rangeland,<00:12:39.960
• ><c> well-managed</c><00:12:40.480><c> grazing</c><00:12:40.800><c> lands,</c> rangeland, well-managed
• grazing lands, rangeland, well-managed grazing lands, and<00:12:41.560><c> what</c><00:12:41.720><c>
• </c> can be mitigated by well-managed can be mitigated by well-managed rangelands.<00:13:15.520><c> Um

Bills: SCR120, SCR71, SCR164, SCR41

Keywords: rangelands, pastoralists, pastoralism, ranching, ranchers, paniolo, livestock, grazing, grasslands, land management, conservation, sustainable agriculture, agriculture, Board of Agriculture and Biosecurity, University of Hawaii, ecosystem services, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, Hawaii counties, International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> in</c><00:38:25.200><c> public</c> ecosystem rights grounded in public ecosystem rights grounded
• , our living breathing um ecosystem, our living breathing ecosystem<00:43:58.880><c> provides</c><00:
• This doesn't give human rights to ecosystems. It makes ecosystems representable.
• </c><00:48:47.760><c> It</c> give human rights to ecosystems. It give human rights to ecosystems.
• </c> to ecosystem rights. to ecosystem rights.

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:

• Community co-management residents.
• They asked how it would apply in a game management unit, or in the forest, or in parks.
• </c><00:31:43.440><c> in</c> think that have particular management in think that have particular management
• Katie Roth with the Commission on Water Resource Management.
• </c> the traditional land use management the traditional land use management expert,<01:01:18.559><c>

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:

• I'm the forestry manager Jennifer Grim.
• </c> ecosystems. Thank you. ecosystems. Thank you. &gt;&gt; Thank<00:21:29.440><c> you.
• Aamoku serves a critical function in the management of Hawaii's natural resources.
• </c><00:30:53.520><c> of</c> critical function in the management of critical function in the management
• </c><00:31:05.520><c> I'm</c> resource management decisions. I'm resource management decisions.

Bills: HCR31

Keywords: rangelands, pastoralists, Hawaii, livestock, environment, sustainability, ecosystem services, Paniolo traditions, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees on Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts and Housing first heard HCR 85, which urges the Department of Land and Natural Resources to transfer parcels in the East Oahu area. DLNR, OPSD, HHFDC, and HCDA testified, and the chairs noted an intent to keep revenues from the lands with DLNR while agencies collaborate until parcels are ready for substantive transfer. Both committees then voted to pass the measure as is, with the recommendation adopted. The committees also heard HCR 101 and HCR 166. HCR 101 was recommended to pass unamended and was adopted by both the Hawaiian Affairs and Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts committees. HCR 166, which asks DLNR to identify state lands in East Oahu suitable for planting native Hawaiian trees, received no opposition in testimony and was also recommended and adopted unamended by both committees. Later, the Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts committee took up several resolutions. HCR 36, establishing a sister-state relationship with Okayama, Japan, drew support from DBED, which highlighted educational, agricultural, and airport-related opportunities, and the committee moved it forward. HCR 19, designating March as March for Water Month, was supported by the Board of Water Supply. HCR 162, creating an arts data mapping task force, received support from DBED and arts advocates, including the Hawaii Youth Symphony. HCR 61, urging investment in reforestation policies, workforce, and nursery capacity, drew broad support from DLNR and multiple community testifiers emphasizing climate resilience, native forests, and storm recovery. The committee also heard HCR 106 on designating Waikīkī as a world surfing reserve, with support from the University of Hawaii, and HCR 14 on a perpetual non-exclusive easement for existing drainage improvements at Waikīkī, which DLNR said had already been approved by the board and only needed legislative passage to execute. HCR 178, concerning a county set-aside for East Maui public trust water resources, drew testimony from the East Maui Water Authority and others supporting local control and public stewardship, while HCR 179, directing the Aamoku Advisory Committee to follow its rules and comply with Sunshine Law, drew testimony both in support and urging amendments to preserve Aamoku’s independent, semi-autonomous role. Because quorum was not available, decision-making on the later measures was deferred to the end of the 3 p.m. agenda.

Bills: SB2373, SB2101, SB2905, SB3231, SB2486, SB2376

Keywords: carbon sequestration, marine ecosystem, climate change, renewable energy, biodiversity, nature-based solutions, organic waste, solid waste, waste diversion, composting, bioconversion, recycling, food waste, green waste, food-soiled paper, wood waste, landfill diversion, waste reduction, waste management, county solid waste plan

Summary: The committee heard SB 2006, which would clarify that a farm dwelling permit in an agricultural district may include a single-family farm dwelling with an accessory employee housing structure, subject to restrictions. Testimony was largely supportive, with comments from the Department of Agriculture Biosecurity, DPP, Hawaii Farm Bureau, Hawaii Realtors, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, Hawaii Farmers Union, Housing Hawaii Future, and several individuals. The chair noted there were nine in support, two opposed, and four offering comments. In decision-making, the chair recommended passing the bill with OPSD-suggested amendments to clarify the definitions of farm employee housing and bona fide agricultural services. The chair also referenced opposing testimony that raised concern the original draft could limit tourism activities that provide supplemental income for bona fide farming operations. The proposed amendments were intended to make clear that farm employee housing is only for workers and not visitor accommodations, while allowing tourism activities on the same parcel if they are secondary and incidental to a bona fide agricultural operation, do not occur in employee housing units, and comply with county ordinances. The committee adopted the recommendation and voted to pass SB 2006 with amendments. The recorded votes showed the chair, vice chair, Senator Rhoads, and Senator Awa in favor, with Senator DeCoite excused. The same pass-with-amendments recommendation was then made to the housing committee and adopted there as well, with Senator Elephante voting aye and Senator Favella excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our memorial asks you to recommend that state land management agencies attend a free workshop for more
• Insects are important because they play essential roles in our ecosystem.
• But I think insects, they're part of the ecosystem.
• My name is Dominica Chavez, advocacy manager at New Mexico Kids Can.
• But to try to politicize... ...looking as to how everything was managed, I think the system was fine.

Bills: SB104, SJR3, SM3

Keywords: wildlife commission, removal procedures, malfeasance, appointed officials, governance, education reform, public education, state board of education, superintendent, chartering authority, constitutional amendment, policy setting, insects, insect workshop, insect identification, ecology, monitoring, management, pollinators, pollination

Transcript Highlights:

• They need to have more people, more management and planning, and I think that's a very important part
• They need to have more management<00:39:16.079><c> and</c><00:39:16.320><c> planning</c><00:39:17.200
• ><c> and</c><00:39:17.440><c> I</c><00:39:17.680><c> think</c> management and planning and I think management
• Your suggestion is that we should transfer the management of the cesspool prioritization tool to the
• But what would it take for the if there was transferring the management of the and sort of ownership.

Bills: HB644, HB1802, HB1569, HB1619, HB1620, HB1730, HB1749

Keywords: PFAS, single-use plastics, environmental health, food ware, pollution reduction, HB1802, conservation banking, conservation bank, mitigation banking, compensatory mitigation, incidental take permit, incidental take license, habitat conservation plan, HCP, DLNR, BLNR, Board of Land and Natural Resources, endangered species recovery committee, threatened species, endangered species

Summary: The committee heard several environmental and energy bills, beginning with HB 644 on single-use plastics. DLNR and DOH supported the measure, and environmental advocates said it would reduce plastic waste in oceans and landfills. Testifiers urged the bill to avoid weakening existing county ordinances, and some supported delaying implementation to use up inventory, while Upstream opposed compostable-plastic exemptions and urged prompt passage. Committee members asked whether reusable and refillable foodware could be added to the PFAS prohibition, and Upstream said that would be consistent with the bill’s goals. The committee then took up HB 1802 on conservation mitigation banks, HB 1569 on microfiber filters for newly manufactured washing machines, and HB 1619 on electric vehicle infrastructure. HB 1802 drew mostly agency testimony from DLNR, with opposition testimony noted from environmental groups, and members discussed whether suggested amendments would address concerns. HB 1569 received limited testimony, with support from the Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition and opposition from the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. HB 1619 was supported by the PUC, Hawaiian Electric, the Department of Transportation, and several advocacy groups; Earthjustice said the bill was needed to address a widening EV charging shortfall and described the funding increase as relatively small compared with the benefits. The committee also heard HB 1620, which would increase the barrel tax to fund the EV charging rebate program. The State Energy Office and PUC offered comments, while the Tax Foundation of Hawaii opposed the special-fund approach and said the bill should also address the non-petroleum fossil-fuel portion of the barrel tax. Earthjustice and youth transportation advocates supported the measure, and the chair asked for information on unused hydrogen fueling subaccount funds; PUC said no hydrogen program funds had been deployed and estimated the balance was likely around $2 million, with exact figures to be provided later. Finally, the committee heard HB 1730 on wastewater systems, which would create a wastewater technical advisory group and fund positions at DOH. DLNR, DOH, OPSD, UH, and several environmental groups supported the bill, emphasizing cesspool pollution, affordability, and the need for more staffing and technical assistance. Testifiers suggested amendments to create a separate cesspool conversion implementation working group and debated the size and composition of the advisory group, including whether to include outside engineers and whether SHIP should be on the panel. No votes were taken during the hearing segment provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• co-management plan.
• co-management plan.
• </c><00:07:42.920><c> co-management</c> northeast elk management co-management northeast elk management
• ><01:33:07.400><c> exists</c> management tax as it exists management tax as it exists started<01:33:09.800
• </c> counties and solid waste management counties and solid waste management organizations<01:35:25.560

Bills: HF3426, HF3896, HF1426, HF3793, HF4061, HF4246

Keywords: natural resources, environment, sustainability, conservation, outdoor recreation, wild rice, watercraft regulation, environmental protection, aquatic ecosystems, HF1426, product stewardship, extended producer responsibility, EPR, electronics recycling, e-waste, battery recycling, circuit boards, printed circuit boards, electrical products, covered products

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> just talking about a nonprofit managing just talking about a nonprofit managing and<00:07:44.880
• <00:37:01.119><c> rangelands</c><00:37:01.760><c> contribute</c> well-managed rangelands contribute well-managed
• </c><00:48:39.520><c> of</c> transferred to DAB for the management of transferred to DAB for the management
• </c> we believe that they're best managed we believe that they're best managed under.<00:48:58.480><c
• </c> DNR doesn't have the budget to manage DNR doesn't have the budget to manage these<00:52:16.960><

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:

• Under this bill, ecosystem service projects can occur on all public lands managed by DNR to generate
• And again, forest management, including forest health management, is allowed in carbon sales.
• They manage the same trusts. They manage the permanent funds for many of these same trusts.
• from ecosystem services when they complement and not displace working forest management 2170 raises
• as a way of managing trust lands.

Bills: HB2170, HB2544, HB2578

Keywords: natural climate solutions, ecosystem services, revenue generation, economic opportunities, environmental policy, water rights, adjudication, Columbia River, environmental impact, natural resources, tribal members, fish and wildlife, commission, indigenous rights, state regulation, 904, all

Summary: The committee began with House Bill 2170, a DNR request bill that would authorize ecosystem service projects on state trust lands, including carbon and other natural climate solutions, with contracts lasting up to 125 years and Board of Natural Resources oversight. The sponsor and DNR said the bill would diversify revenue, modernize forest management, and help meet climate goals; supporters argued it would add tools without mandating changes to timber harvests. Opponents from timber companies, counties, school districts, and logging groups warned the bill could reduce harvest levels, lower trust revenue, hurt rural jobs and mills, and lock up working forests for generations. Supporters from environmental groups and some local officials said the bill would create more stable revenue, support climate and watershed benefits, and could still allow timber harvests. No vote was taken, and the chair noted HB 1508 and HB 2170 were both active ecosystem services vehicles for possible amendments. The committee also briefly heard House Bill 2578, which would add four tribal commissioner seats and four alternates to the Fish and Wildlife Commission, with representation from federally recognized tribes on both sides of the Cascades. The staff briefing described the new positions, qualifications, staggered terms, and quorum changes. The prime sponsor said the bill would strengthen co-management and tribal-state partnership, but the hearing was suspended before public testimony and no action was taken. Later, the committee took up House Bill 2544, a pilot process for the Upper Columbia Water Rights Adjudication. Staff explained that the bill would direct Ecology to begin the adjudication in two phases, first focusing on tribal and federal claimants and then all other claimants, with a report due in 2035. The sponsor said the bill would make a decades-long process more efficient and allow earlier settlement discussions without reducing anyone’s rights. Colville Tribes testified in support, as did other tribal representatives, saying the phased approach would improve clarity and efficiency; the hearing then moved into public testimony on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:08:10.560><c> So,</c><00:08:10.800><c> let's</c> entrepreneurial ecosystem.
• So, let's entrepreneurial ecosystem.
• ,</c><00:17:41.919><c> there's</c> entrepreneurial ecosystem, there's entrepreneurial ecosystem, there's
• We always want entrepreneur ecosystem.
• Your comments that type of ecosystem.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call: 00:00:28 Strengthening Kentucky's Entrepreneurial Ecosystem: 00:02:45 Entrepreneur Led Economic Development: Kentucky’s Path Forward: 00:31:45, 958, all

Bills: SCR56, SCR25, SCR79, SCR179, SCR181, SCR182, SR54, SR22, SR81, SR174, SR176, SR177

Keywords: lifeguards, first responders, public safety, ocean safety, emergency response, community wellbeing, Pohakuloa, condemnation, federal government, land sovereignty, Hawaii, native Hawaiians, public trust land, invasive species, octocoral, Pearl Harbor, environment, Navy responsibility, marine ecosystem, ecosystem preservation

Summary: The committee first heard SCR 56 and SR 54, which recognize open water lifeguards as first responders and acknowledge their role in emergency response and public safety. Testifiers from the Hawaiian Lifeguard Association, Hawaii Water Safety Coalition, Honolulu and Kauai Ocean Safety, and a junior guard all strongly supported the resolutions, describing lifeguards as often first on scene for drownings, cardiac arrest, spinal injuries, flooding rescues, and other emergencies. Several speakers said formal recognition would better reflect the work lifeguards already do and could improve training, support services, pay equity, and access to benefits such as retirement and trauma resources. Members asked about what legal or administrative changes would follow, and the discussion suggested the resolutions were a first step toward broader recognition and related policy changes. The committee then took up SCR 25 and SR 22, opposing federal condemnation or threats of condemnation to take control of Pohakuloa and other state land. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs supported the resolutions, saying Pohakuloa has deep historical, cultural, genealogical, and ecological significance and that any future decisions should go through existing state legal processes with meaningful consultation with Native Hawaiians. Members discussed the role of the governor’s advisory process, the need to follow DLNR/BLNR procedures, and concerns about environmental and health violations at the site. The committee also noted 14 written testimonies in support. Next, the committee heard SCR 79 and SR 81, urging the U.S. Navy to take responsibility for eradicating octocoral and other invasive species in Pearl Harbor waters, including West, Middle, and East Loch. DLNR supported the resolutions, and testimony focused on the spread of invasive coral, the difficulty of eradication, and the limited access state agencies have inside Pearl Harbor. Members raised concerns about contamination, responsibility for the problem, and whether the Navy should fund or carry out the cleanup; DLNR said it could not speak to broader contamination issues but supported the resolution as a way to encourage action. The committee then began discussion of SCR 179 and SR 174, which urge Maui County to enforce fire code provisions on brush clearance, fuel breaks, roadside vegetation clearing, and emergency access, with written support noted from Aloha Independent Living Hawaii.

Transcript Highlights:

• would essentially preclude the Commissioner of the Department of Conservation from being able to manage
• So, you know, my responsibility is to manage those resources and not be swayed by personal profit or
• So we have used that as a management tool in the past.
• As a management tool in the past, very effectively. Yes, sir.
• these fisheries, and I think... ...that manages these fisheries, and I think we've shown a pretty good

Bills: HB1, HB143, HB1, HB92

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:

• ><c> program</c><00:10:36.800><c> shall</c> facility management lease program shall facility management
• </c> projects in the special management area. projects in the special management area.
• So that's the larger management area.
• . management. management.
• Requires preparation of management plans and procedures.

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:

• experts to evaluate different management experts to evaluate different shorelines,<00:38:49.760><c>
• their one employee, how is that managing their one employee, how is that management<01:20:14.800><c>
• happening if there are no management happening if there are no meetings?
• Um, so as the chair of the Aamoku, how does the Aamoku manage its employee?
• </c> 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:

• There are also an important food source within ecosystems.
• This memorial asks the state to support and recognize an ecosystem...
• And even wasps also help the ecosystem in the same way bees do.
• This is why it's so important to leave the ecosystem be.
• Maybe the one thing helping run the ecosystem.

Bills: SB154, SB187, SB193, SM3

Keywords: insurance, wildfire, flood damage, natural disasters, property coverage, water projects, appropriation, New Mexico, finance authority, infrastructure, New Mexico Finance Authority, funding, SB193, acequia, community ditch, irrigation works construction fund, water infrastructure, ditch infrastructure, irrigation, New Mexico water law

Transcript Highlights:

• This memorial is part of the ecosystem. To the public, especially students.
• There are also an important food source within ecosystems.
• And even wasps also help the ecosystem in the same way bees do.
• This is why it's so important to leave the ecosystem be.
• Maybe the one thing helping run the ecosystem.

Bills: SB154, SB187, SB193, SM3

Keywords: insurance, wildfire, flood damage, natural disasters, property coverage, water projects, appropriation, New Mexico, finance authority, infrastructure, New Mexico Finance Authority, funding, SB193, acequia, community ditch, irrigation works construction fund, water infrastructure, ditch infrastructure, irrigation, New Mexico water law

Summary: The Senate Conservation Committee first took up Senate Memorial 3, presented by Senator O’Malley on behalf of Senator Bergman and a group of Rio Doso High School students and Wild Friends. The memorial asks state agencies to participate in a no-cost workshop on insect identification, ecology, monitoring, and management, and to help educate the public about insects. Students, conservation specialists, and an entomologist testified that insects are essential to pollination, ecosystems, agriculture, and biodiversity, while also noting declining insect populations and the need for more public understanding. Some senators raised concerns about the memorial’s wording, including whether it should be broadened from insects to arthropods and whether the Department of Agriculture, rather than Game and Fish, should be involved. The committee discussed timing and implementation, and the sponsor agreed to work on amendments. The memorial passed on a due pass motion by a vote of 8-0, with one excused. The committee then heard Senate Bill 154, which would require wildfire-related homeowners coverage to include flood damage caused by post-fire conditions for a five-year period. Senator Duhigg and the Office of the Superintendent of Insurance argued the bill responds to the Ruidoso fires and subsequent flooding, noting that many homes were destroyed by mudslides and that flood insurance is often unavailable or inadequate. Supporters, including Ruidoso officials, affected residents, and attorneys, said the bill would help homeowners recover from cascading wildfire and flood losses. Opponents from the insurance industry and business groups warned the bill would be an outlier, could significantly raise premiums, and might reduce availability of homeowners insurance statewide. Committee members questioned how the mandate would work, whether it should be optional, and how costs would be allocated. The bill passed on a 5-4 vote. Finally, the committee briefly heard Senate Bill 187, which appropriates $202,000 from the general fund to the New Mexico Finance Authority’s Water Project Fund for future water projects authorized by the legislature. The Finance Authority said the funding would help address a gap between available money and the 113 recommended projects, totaling about $522 million, including water conservation, flood prevention, storage, wastewater, and watershed projects. Members asked for more detail on the locations and types of projects, and the Finance Authority said it would provide the list from the companion authorization bill. The committee then moved the bill forward on a do pass motion.

Bills: SB330, SB2069, SB2095

Keywords: elk population, wildlife management, Oklahoma State University, veterinary medicine, ecosystem health, habitat assessment, advanced nuclear energy, nuclear power, small modular reactor, SMR, microreactor, generation III+, generation IV, nuclear reactor, nuclear permitting, nuclear licensing, Oklahoma Corporation Commission, OCC, Oklahoma Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, Oklahoma Advanced Nuclear Development Revolving Fund

Bills: SB330, SB2069, SB2095

Keywords: elk population, wildlife management, Oklahoma State University, veterinary medicine, ecosystem health, habitat assessment, advanced nuclear energy, nuclear power, small modular reactor, SMR, microreactor, generation III+, generation IV, nuclear reactor, nuclear permitting, nuclear licensing, Oklahoma Corporation Commission, OCC, Oklahoma Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, Oklahoma Advanced Nuclear Development Revolving Fund

Summary: The Wildlife Committee considered and advanced two Senate bills. Pro Tem Moore presented SB 330, described as an elk population study bill related to the Northwest Zone and a mirror of a House measure. After brief discussion, the committee voted 7-0 to do pass the bill. Representative Townley then presented SB 269, which would prohibit taking migratory birds through baiting and align Oklahoma law with federal law. The committee asked no substantive questions and voted 6-0 to do pass. Townley also presented SB 2095, which sets fees and fines for hunting guides, with higher fees for nonresidents and a licensing exemption for certain helpers. He said the bill was intended to protect landowners and hunters and support Oklahoma’s reputation as a hunting destination. Members asked about the scope and fee amounts, and were told the fees would be $1,000 for residents and $2,000 for nonresidents. The committee voted 6-0 to do pass. The chair then noted this would likely be the final meeting of the year.