Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, they've come a long way many years, and the protection of our native birds, I think, has flourished
• These are rules for regulating game bird hunting and regulating game mammal hunting.
• These are rules for regulating game bird hunting and regulating game mammal hunting.
• These are rules for regulating game bird hunting and regulating game mammal hunting.
• one in an area appropriate for a bird one in an area appropriate for a bird sanctuary,<01:46:36.639

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.

Bills: HB 43, HB 3364, HB 3469, HB 3479

Keywords: agriculture, finance, young farmers, financial assistance, pest control, nuisance birds, local governance, regulation, outdoor activities, public safety, Rio Grande, vegetation management, border security, environmental regulation, Carrizo cane

Bills: SB3253, SB3154, SB3254

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 Energy and Environmental Protection heard a long series of resolutions focused largely on waste reduction, energy planning, and environmental protection. Early measures included HR 12/HCR 10 on a permanent landfill host benefits program for Honolulu, HCR 148/HCR 157 on a demolition waste reduction working group, and HR 184/HCR 194 on a mattress stewardship program working group. Testimony on these waste-related measures was generally supportive from environmental groups and some individuals, while the Department of Health supported the mattress stewardship proposal. The Department of Health also commented that a proposed study on recyclable/biodegradable/compostable labeling was very broad and would require additional resources to carry out effectively. The committee then took up several energy-related resolutions. HR 192/HCR 202 would create a task force on Hawaii’s future energy pathways, and HR 194/HCR 204 would ask the Public Utilities Commission to conduct a comprehensive analysis of cost reductions and financial risk. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, the Hawaii State Energy Office, and the PUC offered support or comments on these measures, with environmental and industry groups also submitting testimony. Members questioned the Energy Office and PUC at length about errors in prior analyses, competitive bidding, and whether utility proposals could proceed through waiver processes; the PUC said any proposal would still be reviewed and that it generally prefers competitive bidding, while the Energy Office said some issues were being characterized differently and would follow up on waiver standards. Additional measures addressed data centers, liquefied natural gas, and utility oversight. HR 196/HCR 206 would convene a working group on the impacts of large data centers, and HR 197/HCR 207 would require conditions before the PUC approves LNG-related costs; testimony on LNG was split, with supporters urging caution and opponents arguing LNG should not be pursued. HR 193/HCR 2003 sought a written status update on implementation of the Hawaii Electric Reliability Administrator, and HR 191/HCR 201 and HR 33/HCR 33 dealt with sewage and wastewater issues, both drawing support from environmental and community groups. The committee also heard strong support for HR 141/HCR 149 on Red Hill remediation meetings and HR 190/HCR 200 on reassessing military PFAS cleanup decisions; the Board of Water Supply testified in support and described ongoing PFAS testing and concerns beyond Red Hill. The transcript ends as the committee moved into decision-making, with the chair indicating a recommendation to pass HR 12/HCR 10.

Bills: HR213, SB2607, SB2043, SB2396, SB2835

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

Bills: HR213, SB2607, SB2043, SB2396, SB2835

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Next up we have Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights Association.
• Next<00:22:37.240> up<00:22:37.400> we<00:22:37.520> have<00:22:37.800> Native
• Next up we have Native Okay, thank you.
• Next up we have Native Hawaiian<00:22:38.480> Gathering<00:22:38.920> Rights<00:22:39.200
• We're recommending adding the assessment of impacts to Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices

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:

• House Bill 1603 is a companion bill to the Historical Society budget that deals with NAGPRA, the Native
• NAGPRA was enacted in 1990 to ensure Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects,

Bills: HB1603

Keywords: Native American, grave protection, repatriation, cultural heritage, tribal compliance, 908, all

Summary: The Appropriations Committee met with a quorum and announced it would begin meeting at 8 a.m. for the rest of the week to work through a growing bill list. The committee first approved House Bill 1603, a companion to the Historical Society budget dealing with NAGPRA, including a $500,000 matching grant to be divided among North Dakota’s five tribes and a committee to address repatriation of human remains and cultural items. The vote was unanimous, 15-0. The committee then considered House Bill 1225, which would increase penalties for reckless endangerment involving a firearm and create a mandatory prison term. After debate over public safety concerns versus the bill’s fiscal note and prison costs, the committee adopted a do not pass recommendation by a 9-6-1 vote. Members also discussed House Bill 1018, the State Historical Society budget, and approved an amendment that adjusted one-time funding items, including NAGPRA compliance, museum exhibits, military gallery funding, local historic grants, and line-of-credit repayment. The amended bill then received a due pass recommendation by a 14-2 vote. The committee next approved House Bill 1468, a behavioral health facility grant for St. Hayes, which supporters said would expand in-state access to acute and adolescent behavioral health care and reduce the need to send patients out of state. The bill passed 14-1. It then amended and passed House Bill 1485, increasing the personal needs allowance for certain Medicaid recipients by $15 and indexing it to inflation; the amendment and the bill as amended both passed 14-2. Finally, the committee approved House Bill 1016, the Adjutant General/National Guard budget, after adopting an amendment that funded disaster relief, response equipment, IT and website costs, and staffing changes for the watch center; the amended bill passed 14-2. The committee adjourned after completing six bills and planned to resume the next morning at 8 a.m.

Bills: SF0052

Keywords: wildlife management, environmental restoration, funding, invasive species, aquatic ecosystems, native fish, habitat conservation, 916, all

Bills: SF0052

Keywords: wildlife management, environmental restoration, funding, invasive species, aquatic ecosystems, native fish, habitat conservation, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Finally, we get something that probably native wines could get into.
• get something that probably that native get something that probably that native wines<00:03:14.319
• organizations as opposed to non-Native Hawaiian organizations?
• licensing to come in from Native licensing to come in from Native Hawaiian<00:15:55.680> organizations
• <00:27:23.039> WC Kan, co-manager Manopono LLC, Native WC Kan, co-manager Manopono LLC, Native

Bills: SB2178

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Programs like the Native American Language Grants or the Alaska Native Education Program, which we call
• Part B and C of title six. serve Alaska Native and Native Hawaiians.
• the Native Hawaiians that implement Native educations funded by the Department of Education grants.
• So that funds allowed that. direct participation of Native entities and Native parents.
• Native people.

Keywords: Native education, Department of Education, federal funding, testimony, treaty obligations, public schools, educational policies, Indigenous students

Summary: The meeting focused on the responsibilities of the U.S. Department of Education towards Native students, highlighting the importance of federal education programs that satisfy treaty obligations to Native communities. Various witnesses testified about the impact of educational policies designed to support Native students who primarily attend public schools. Concerns were voiced over recent proposals that could potentially undermine these programs, citing the role of federal funding in ensuring successful educational outcomes for Native youth. The chair of the committee emphasized the need for continued federal support and attention to the unique educational challenges faced by Indigenous populations.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> And we will move on to uh Native >> And we will move on to uh Native Hawaiian<00:
• that we've lost a lot of these native that we've lost a lot of these native fishes<00:25:37.279>
• <00:26:17.120> Rights the Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights the Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights
• <00:31:50.320> Hawaiian very humbly um as a Native Hawaiian very humbly um as a Native Hawaiian
• MOKU within the state. 66 au pua native MOKU within the state. 66 au pua native Hawaiian<00:36:35.040

Bills: HB2101

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Native Hawaiians make up the highest percentage of people Hawaii sends to out-of-state facilities.
• Native<00:19:31.679> Hawaiian<00:19:32.160> make<00:19:32.320> up<00:19:32.480><
• c> the<00:19:32.640> highest Native Hawaiian make up the highest Native Hawaiian make up the
• House Concurrent Resolution Task Force 85 recommended that we bring our people home, and so did the Native

Bills: HB1769

Keywords: criminal justice reform, rehabilitation, private prisons, racial equity, Native Hawaiians, community well-being, mass incarceration, 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 1769, which would require the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to incrementally reduce the number of people incarcerated in private out-of-state correctional institutions. The DCR director opposed the bill, saying the department does not control overall prison population levels because courts determine admissions, and arguing that Hawaiʻi’s in-state facilities are already over capacity, especially Halawa, which he said is 165% over design capacity. He said only a small portion of the population is under departmental control through furlough programs and argued that bringing people home would require building a new medium-security prison. Supporters, including the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, the Public Defender’s office, and several individuals, argued the bill creates a phased, accountable path to reduce reliance on mainland prisons and bring people home. Supporters emphasized the harms of separating incarcerated people from ʻohana and culture, the disproportionate impact on Native Hawaiians, and the need for diversion, treatment, re-entry support, and fair sentencing. Several testifiers also said the department has more control than it claimed, pointing to underused furlough options, reclassification, and empty beds at some in-state facilities, while others urged clearer statutory language and guardrails. Members questioned the director about whether people could be reclassified or moved to available beds at facilities such as Kulani and Waiawa, and about whether the department could do more through staffing and contract changes. The director said some proposals had been sent to the Department of Human Resource Development, but that major facility changes would be costly and that minimum-security facilities would need substantial upgrades to house medium-security inmates. After discussion, the chair said the committee would defer HB 1769 to Wednesday, February 18, 2026, at 11:30 a.m. for decision-making and adjourned the meeting.

Bills: SB2702

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Those include areas where they're restricting fish movement to protect a native strain of pure cutthroat
• <00:03:28.400> to<00:03:28.720> protect<00:03:29.040> a<00:03:29.360> native
• <00:03:29.760> strain fish movement to protect a native strain fish movement to protect a
• native strain of<00:03:30.319> pure<00:03:30.959> cutthroat<00:03:31.519> trout.
• Uh, there are more than 40,000 native fish and 18,000 trout lost in this canal every year.

Bills: SF0052, SF0024

Keywords: wildlife management, environmental restoration, funding, invasive species, aquatic ecosystems, native fish, habitat conservation, lottery, debit card payments, gambling regulations, state revenue, financial transactions, 916, all

Bills: SF0052, SF0024

Keywords: wildlife management, environmental restoration, funding, invasive species, aquatic ecosystems, native fish, habitat conservation, lottery, debit card payments, gambling regulations, state revenue, financial transactions, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

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

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

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• The length of care of the wild bird may not exceed 6 months; it doesn’t go on forever.
• It costs us just on the clinic side a quarter million dollars to treat 1,500 birds.
• Um, today I'm protecting native species. Um, today I'm speaking in opposition to this bill.
• They have hospitals, but they are not supposed to treat wild birds at all.
• They can't treat a wild bird. It depends on the species, sir.

Bills: HB448, HB448

Keywords: wildlife rehabilitation, conservation, good samaritan, injured animals, orphaned animals, debilitated wildlife, wild birds, wild animals, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, DCNR, permit exemption, animal rescue, animal welfare, veterinary medicine, veterinary licensing, animal cruelty, wildlife care, rehabilitation act, non-federally protected species, endangered species

Bills: SCR13, SB1248

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, TPWD, harvest reports, wildlife harvest data, public information act, open records, confidentiality, hunter privacy, angler data, game animals, game birds, fur-bearing animals, nongame animals

Bills: SCR13, SB1248

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, TPWD, harvest reports, wildlife harvest data, public information act, open records, confidentiality, hunter privacy, angler data, game animals, game birds, fur-bearing animals, nongame animals

Summary: The Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs met without a quorum at first, then later established quorum and proceeded with testimony and votes. Senate Bill 1248, by Chair Perry, was explained as a narrow Open Records Act exception to protect harvest report location data collected through Texas Parks and Wildlife’s digital tagging system. Support testimony came from Matt Wagner of the Texas Chapter of The Wildlife Society, who said the bill would protect private land and sensitive biological information while preserving useful wildlife data. No one testified against the bill, and it was left pending until later in the meeting. The committee then heard Senate Concurrent Resolution 13, which urges the State Department and the International Boundary and Water Commission to press Mexico to comply with the 1944 Water Treaty and deliver its share of Rio Grande water. Senator Hinojosa, farmers, municipal officials, and other witnesses described severe water shortages in South Texas, low reservoir levels, crop losses, the closure of the Valley sugar industry, and the need for alternative supplies such as desalination, reuse, and drainage-runoff projects. Members also discussed treaty enforcement, regional drought, and the role of cartels and Mexican water storage, while emphasizing that Texas must also invest in its own water infrastructure. The committee also considered Senate Bill 740, which the committee substitute amended to require the Public Utility Commission to adopt a standardized application form for system improvement charges and complete related rulemaking by September 1, 2026, applying only to applications filed on or after that date. Members discussed concerns about water wholesalers using the process to delay cases and drive up costs, and the need for more transparency and PUC resources. The committee voted to adopt the substitute and report SB 740 favorably. After returning to the earlier items, the committee voted SB 1248 out favorably and recommended it for the local and uncontested calendar, and voted SCR 13 out favorably as well. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.