>> But if you're asking for 200 million and you can barely do 200 million, how how do you how do you then attack the the backlog? If you keep getting 200 million every year and you can barely do I mean that's that's a lot to do in one year. Uh how do you then attack the backlog? >> That is a very good question and I think And that's what we need you guys to to respond to. >> Go ahead. >> Yeah. I mean, it's it's daunting. It's it's daunting. >> Yeah, it is. >> And and actually what's lapsing in five months is actually $900 million. That's right. The bianium budget, >> typical historical batting budget for the deal is 454 million a year for the last 15 years. I haven't heard that number. I don't know where Mr. Fujitani gets that number from, but >> Okay.
So, what how much is going to lapse? >> I I I can get again I can get that decision. I have the number with me. >> About how many? I >> I don't have the number with you. >> So, how can you discredit his >> I'm not I'm not discrediting. I'm I'm just saying I'm not sure where he got the number from. I'm not discrediting his number. >> Okay. Well, absence of your numbers. We're going to have to take somebody's numbers, right? >> No, it it's in the budget bill. The budget bill of lapsing in this year is $1 something billion dollars for the DOE. In the last 15 years, it's historically average 450 more than years. So you, like I said, >> the typical pattern is you get this money, you encumber it, then you next this you spend the next summers to to to do it.
Co is actually when everyone caught up because no one was there. Uh cranked their construction. All these other agencies cranked construction, but unfortunately it wasn't scheduled. Not Keith's fault. He was just it was somebody else that was in charge of that. >> Well, no matter what it is, it's just now you got this problem. So, you got to clear it up. And if you don't clear it up, what happens is you get escalation charges, material costs. You're legally bound to pay this [clears throat] to contractors. So, you have two options. >> Ledge has to fund it to clean it up or you're going to settle. Otherwise, you're going to get sued by contractors. I used to do this as an attorney. I'm a construction litigation attorney. >> So that's what you do. >> So we're legally bound to those contracts and to pay what are we paying on those contracts?
>> Um at that moment in time it was a billion. Yeah. Escalation completion charges change. >> Do we have an idea what the escalation cost is to all these these um unspent CIP funds? >> It's a case by case on each contract depending how long it is. Right? Because when a contractor bids on a contract, it's for that period of time [snorts] assuming you'll get a notice to proceed within 120 days. Any delay upon that, then you triggers escalation. So if it's years, it could be significant. >> How do we calculate that? >> You'd have to take each contract, determine when it was issued, what's the time period, how much escalation for that. >> And that's kind of what I wanted when we asked for this list. >> You can't get it from report. You have to look at each contract. And that's what I wanted.
each contract to tell us what was that and what and what when it was supposed to complete it. That's kind of what I was trying to ask for so that we can get a sense of how much is in you know it's one thing to have these money sitting there but what are we paying escalation cost and where is that escalation cost does it just add to this amount >> yes so there's several right escalation is just when you give the notice to proceed and now you actually buy the materials but you have to buy it at current cost then you have the construction which gets scheduled and then you have change orders as a result of the construction on the perceived circumstances so there's multiple buckets of money that are needed to complete a construction contract. Escalation is the first one. Changers are the second.
Construction management is the fee which you need to manage that construction so it's done right. So those are the three largest buckets of money. Historically >> you get the money to pay the escalation cost. It just goes to the bottom line of the contract. >> Typically you blow by any contingency within the first escalation. So your only option is project completion funds and that supplements to finish all these projects. >> Okay. >> Yeah, there's a lot of assumptions uh there uh you know escalation issues don't become an issue unless they're construction contracts. We have a lot of the sign contracts that are in those old things uh that you know >> Yeah, that's not the point though. The point is all of these costs add up and we just want to get a handle on it. Whether it's escalation costs, whether change order cost, whether it's sitting there, what I mean I had Kayi Kayi bridge.
Okay. Bridge. We put $3 million in it. Rusty hoes the kids pass by every day. Okay. So, we had the the the DOE wrote reason why health and risk and accidents and all that. The money got the money got released, right? We gave out a contract to to Mitsunaga, I believe it was. They did an initial thing and then two years later, two years later now after we got the release of the funds, two years later, we get a letter saying, "Oh, we're lapsing them funds." Why? Because we don't own the bridge. The city owns the bridge. It took us, it took DOE two years to figure out they didn't own the bridge after they made a reason why we should have the funds, get it released, governor released this, we give out a contract, and then all of a sudden we don't own the bridge and they lapse the money, the $3 million.
I mean, that's ridiculous. So now we're in the situation now we got to find the money to do it again. Okay? Because that bridge is getting worse. And if some kid dies, guess who is going to be liable? We are. the state's going to be liable. Did they reach out to the city? No, they didn't reach out to the city. They didn't do anything. They just lapsed the funds. Didn't even didn't even inform us or inform the legislators of the district, >> which is troubling. Yeah. And to meet with the principal, he wasn't even he wasn't even informed when this was going on. So, there is a problem. If we go on the on the tracking system, nothing on the tracking system. Well, I cannot argue with that past project, but I can say that it's not a billion. It's not billions of dollars lapsing in the fiscal year.
That's not correct. And we can get you the lapsing. We reported it to the board just at a couple meetings ago. >> We'll see that at the next meeting that we're at because if it's in the budget bill, then it's somewhere there. But monies do lapse. We do have a pattern of money lapsing in addition to encumbered funds that don't lapse because you encumber it, but then that doesn't get built. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you. Okay. [clears throat] Facilities. We're on House Bill 2398 relating to libraries. Great. At least we're not talking about CIPs here. Clarifies the board of education through state library as exclusive authority over the development, use, support, and improvement and maintenance of public library system facilities. Allows the board of education to authorize the state library to exercise exclusive control of certain land for development or expansion purposes subject to legislative appropriation.
Okay. And I'm sure we have the librarian here to testify. If I can find my testifiers list. Here we go. Stacey Aldrich. >> Okay. Do you know what I say about standing on your testimony? >> Come come come forward to give us give people understanding of what you're standing on. >> Mallerie Fujitani for the Hawaii State Public Library System. Um thank you. Uh this measure is um and we're in uh support of it. Um it will help clarify and provide additional more detailed guidance that the state library system when we do expend uh legislative appropriations at the at our public and school libraries that we have um authority to do so. um a recent situation had come up and um the DOE told us that the land was not ours. So we um our construction start delayed by 2 months and so we were concerned about escalation fees.
We were forced into a um right of entry and MOA um and we had to commit to certain things that I don't think were necessarily binding on us. uh which included us. If we ever did any forward construction or renovation to the new public library, we would have to get approvals from the DOE facilities office even though the public library system buildings are under the authority of the board of ed and the state library and not the DOE. >> Okay. So, this bill will clear clear that up and I think >> it'll provide additional clarity. Um and also we in our testimony we noted um a situation that uh Senator Hashimoto is a familiar with regarding um just lack of clarity by other government agencies about who has control over library properties >> and I think we had the Senate version bill. >> Yeah. Similar >> but it didn't pass out, did it?
>> It Yeah, it's moving in the House. >> It is moving in the House. Okay, good. >> Anybody Any other questions? If not, thank you. >> Thank you. Um see >> hello again um chair senators of the committee um the Jesse Suki deputy superintendent of operations um for the DOE. Um, we oppose the bill because it goes against, I think, what the legislature tried to do under act 307, which was to consolidate all the DOE land and and make it more expedient um and efficient for development of those lands. Um, we're not concerned about um libraries that are not on school campuses. We're concerned about the 13 libraries that are on school campuses. uh state library system already has um control over the facilities and operations under HRS chapter 312. So that's not the issue. The issue um is when a library is being developed um and over the life of it, you know, if there's going to make improvements and operations, we need to have things in writing with the library and we do um that talks about how we're going to keep the campus safe for students um and teachers as libraries are open to the general public and sometimes in the middle of campus.
Um and uh we'll rest on our testimony. Thank you. >> Thank you. BOE, you're not here. Uh Sani Pi, individual in support. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure?
Members, any questions? Questions? Okay, moving on. Uh House Bill 2534 House has draft one relating to robotics. Appropriates funds to Department of Education to establish robotics as an intercolastic sport. We have a number of people who are probably all not here. Uh Kayashi for uh Department of Education, Terry. Aloha chair and members of the committee. Terry Yoshiima from the Department of Education. Uh we stand on a written testimony which provides comments on this measure and concerns. The department recognizes immense value of robotics and STEM education but has strong concerns regarding its as reclassification as an intercolastic sport. Uh doing so would subject robotics to rigid athletic rules such as seasonal windows and restricted periods that conflict with the yearround the nature of global robotics and competitions. >> Thank you >> Ed. No from charter schools. >> I'm sorry. >> Okay. Um, Hay Yang Martin testifying for WA Robotics.
>> Not on Zoom. Chair. >> Okay. Joshua Tom support on Zoom. >> Joshua. >> Yes, I'm here. >> I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Okay. Um, aloha chair, um, and members of the committee. My name is Joshua Tom. I'm a student at James Campbell High School. I stand in strong support of HP2534. However, I >> You got to speak out a little bit louder or raise your volume. We have a hard time hearing. >> I apologize. We're actually at our competition right now. So, a lot of us are kind of It's very loud right now. So, I do apologize if you um if you're unable to hear me, please let me know. Um, I stand in strong support for this bill because of the significance robotics programs do have here in the state. Um, and by providing resources and recognition for these programs, it would do so much more for our abilities to have competitions like the one I'm at today.
However, I do also recognize some of the concerns, especially with the intercolastic sport title. How I would like to uh point out how esports is considered under the HHSAA. However, it is not a sanctioned sport, but it is still under the athletic association. And through that, all of the concerns with the three-hour practice times, um the fundraising, and a lot of that, um they do not apply to esports. And so my what I suggest for an amendment would be to have it under the HHSAA, not necessarily with the um sanctioned sport title in order for us to get that recognition, get our competitions funded for and continue to support us while not subjecting us to those rigid rules that a sport title would have for um the leagues as just under the HHSAA as esports is. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, let's see. We have two.
>> Yes, go ahead quickly. >> Sorry, one more thing. So, I did stop by your guys' offices, too. And I haven't got the invitations. If you guys are able to um come down by if you can see, this is all the backgrounds and everything for our competition. So, I'm sure you folks would love it. >> Thank you, Joshua. Appreciate that. Okay, we have what? Three others in opposition. 2 4 6 8 nine in support. Anyone else here wishing to testify on this measure?
Uh hearing none. Members, >> we do have um a few others wishing to testify if that's okay. >> Um okay. Can you get them on? One minute. >> Yes, you're ready. >> Aloha. Please identify yourself. >> Aloha. My name is Alise Angel.
So, good afternoon members of the committee. My name is Alise, team captain of Maui High School's robotics team, and I strongly support House Bill 2534. Robotics has taught me leadership, real world engineering, and problem solving I could never learn in a traditional classroom. However, as a Hawaii based team, our competition costs, including robot shipping and airfare, exceed $25,000 a year. And due to cutbacks in federal and state funding, we struggle to ensure all students can participate. However, this bill will protect the programs necessary for Hawaii's STEM future. And beyond our own team, we organized the Maui VEX IQ League, bringing in robotics to elementary and middle school students across Maui and creating pathways for Hawaii's next generation of leaders. And I humbly ask for your support in passing House Bill 2534. And Senator Hashimoto, if you'd like to come by St. Louis school to check out our competition before you fly back to Maui.
You're very welcome to and um mahalo for your time. [laughter] >> Thank you. >> Hi. >> I would also like to testify my name is Lansy Tollis. This is my fourth year on the K robotics team. Um I would like to say that I cannot fully support this bill um as it stands now. I think with it being considered as a sanction sport, there are a lot of things that come to um stand against us in terms of robotics. I believe especially with Khe um being under a sport and being under a superintendent, our um our sports um organizer is not going to be the person that's going to be best able to um support us in growing robotics. Additionally, with all of the restrictions that come with being a sanctioned sport, um we'd see I I believe we'd see um a reduction in our robotics team, um I believe that with the amendments being a non-sanctioned sport, this could be a successful bill, but um as it stands now, I cannot say that I can fully support this.