001this meeting including the audio and video of remote participants is being streamed live on YouTube you will find links to viewing options for all Senate meetings on the live and On Demand video page of our website in the unlikely event that we have to abruptly end this hearing due to Major technical difficulties the committee will reconvene to discuss any outstanding business on Tuesday April 1st 10:03 a.m. in this room this is decision making oral oral testim no oral testimony will be taken for these measures if you're interested in reviewing the written testimony please go to our website you will find the link on the status page okay this uh calling to order the 10: a.m. committee on ways of means and education this is House Bill 2222 so I'll defer to the education chair on
002the recommendation thank you chair so um House Bill 422 relating to school facilities the recommendation of the committee on education will be to pass with amendments um adopting an amendment from from the school facilities authority to clarify that any existing written agreement Executives executed under HRS 32A part six subpart B prior to its repeal will remain effective unless all parties mutually agree to the agreement also we will be amending section one of the bill to conform with proposed amendments repeal the construction fee component of the school impact fee but retain the land contribution requirement and the inl fee remove all references to the construction cost component impact fee and related language in HRS 302a part 6 subpart B repeal HRS 302 a607 and 302a 1611 exempt the following new and existing developments from school impact
003fees government projects developments by the department of Hawaiian homelands for use by beneficiaries single room dwellings and developments pursuant to HRS 46-51 and 21-38 and projects that meet the definition of affordable housing pursuant to HRS 46-525 and 201h amend HRS 302 a606 to increase the required number of units to satisfy the land component impact fee to 100 in sections 1 2 3A 3B and E require the school facilities authority to adopt rules and policies governing the collection of school impact fees fur the recommendation of the state Auditor's report remove the repeal of HRS 302a part 6 subpart B and HRS 46-42 do5 require the school facilities authority to provide a report to the legislature on the effect of repealing the construction portion of school impact fees no later than December 6 I'm sorry no later
004than December 15 2025 and insert a Sunset date of June 30th 2029 oh I'm sorry follow am I let me read that again require the school facilities authority to provide a report to the legislature on the effect of repealing the construction portion of school impact fees no later than December 15 2026 insert a sens of date of June 30th 2029 also we will let the committee report reflect the amendments to this measure are NE necessary to confirm the efficiency the efficacy of school impact fees and that the Sunset date may be repealed if the report supports making the contents of this measure permanent thank you chair thank you so recommendation was the pass the set amendments any discussion yes chair go ahead okay thanks um I understand this measure has to do with the state
005projects because the school facilities in state what's the impact on the counties uh because we know that counties make their own arrangement in development fees with regards to developments that occur on their Islands uh and they already have impact fees so is there just is there an impact no the it's okay all right so the impact fees that we were talking about um the only reason why I say that because I never get to hear all the um things so we're not we're not repeating the impact fees not completely not completely not the land por okay further question then um okay because when the counties approved development fees and it has to do with lands and so the lands uh are set aside for a school as an example so does doe accept that as
006a fa facilities property and then it no that's why there's some changes the law goes to SFA some of this yeah they negotiated they want the land okay still have to give the land all right just just for discussions how the impacts would be on the counties level thank you chair okay chair vot okay uh so chair votes for um pass with amendments chair voto hi Senator elepante hi Senator Hashimoto hi Senator enoi Senator kuha hi Senator kidani hi Senator Kim hi Senator Lee excuse Senator Wai yes Senator fella just with this changes I want to um change my no to a yes thank you chair yes yes yes recommendation adopted thank you thank you same recommendation for Education committee chair votes I chair votes I on House Bill 422 sd1 Vice chair V Senator
007Hashimoto hi Senator Senator the court hi M's adopted five eyes thank you request okay we're going to adjourn and then we're going to just take a couple minutes for the next agenda okay calling to order the Joint Committee but is a hearing okay so doot chairs Vice chairs Ed sniffin with Hoy dot um we support the measure um and we support the language that's in the measure right now our from our perspective it's overly broad compared to what we're trying to get done here um in general we don't want to exempt construction what we want to do is make sure that we can look move forward on Innovative approaches to to procurement and one of the big ones that we're trying to push is cmgc construction manager general contractor which allows us to hire a
008contractor up front to work with our designers to innovate to make sure that we can get the best Solutions available then have that contract agre a maximum bid price if that bid price is acceptable we can turn that gen that cm into the general contractor if it's not acceptable we bid it out to our normal processes during those processes we would ensure that the contractor sub listing is still available they ensure that we we keep the our procurement process the same as possible however this allows us a lot more Innovations make sure that the projects move forward 40% faster at better prices thank you chair thank you members any question uh State procurement office good morning chairs Vice chairs and members of the committee Matthew CH testifying on behalf of the state procurement office of
009Bon the state procurement office stands on its written testimony in support of the language of HB 1155 HD1 we do understand that the dot has offered alternative alternate language to HRS 103d 405 instead of 103 d-12 and we would like the opportunity to work with the DT and members of the industry to come to agreeable language thank you thank you Dwayne Bautista morning chair Vice chair members of the committee morning first of all I want to clarify um on my written testimony on the digital side there was a mixup so I stand on my written testimony and opposition okay thank you thank you that's the current language though [Music] yeah okay sub contractor Association morning CH D Cruz chair Meli members of the joint committees I'm Tim lions with subcontractors Association we are strongly opposed
010to this bill um we're often perplexed by the fact that the legislature adopted the procurement code is a fair way of doing business um I was around when it was last Rewritten and I remember all the agencies and departments coming in adding amendments making changes and then lo and behold I think it was the second year after that the first agency asked for an exemption from the procurement code and we pretty much had somebody ask for an exemption ever since um I think the bottom line of that audit if there's something wrong with the procurement code we should fix it and not do exemptions um in our prior in prior testimony it was indicated that this was needed in order to do emergency situations um 103 d307 deals with emergency um procurements and if there
011are emergencies that arise that don't fit into that statute it is likely that this statute ought to be amended as opposed to a wholesale uh exemption um again the the Kermit code was invented in order to be a fair dealing it not only protects the State against the contractors but the contractors against the state for that matter and vendors to vendors perhaps our biggest objection to all of this is when you take that exemption out you also remove a number of protections including retainage equality including prompt payment those are all provisions of the procurement code and we think that they're very important to keep um and again if the situation needs to should be addressed um we should be amending 307 thank you Iron Workers hello chairs Vice chairs members of the committee my name
012is Cody sua with the iron worker stabilization fund uh we are strongly opposed to this measure uh we strongly support the procurement code we believe that it promotes fairness and uh we believe in the exemptions that's proposed here it's not clearly defined it's going to open it up to uh could open it up to corruption and uh picking and choosing who they want rather than the most responsible bids out there so we stand on our written testimony thank you thank you ibw 1260 elevator constructors Building Trades Council oh good morning senator thank you for having me this morning just want to convey that the elevated Constructors is in strong opposition to this bill and I we stand by our written testimony thank you thank you Bill tra Council morning chair Vice chairs members of the
013committee my name is Gino suena the executive director of the Hawai building construction trades Council which represents 18 construction trade unions here in the state of Hawaii uh we are opposed to HB uh 1155 uh currently when in its form um I do understand that there is um the intent of what they wanted to do but uh as as what we normally do is we always we're going to be opposed to any exemptions to procurement those are those that Lo that that code is there to to protect the the taxpayer and and prevent any type of fraud or anything so um as a as a rulle for thumb that's what we always do um you you heard of a lot of our Affiliates already in testimony against in in opposition um but I'm I'm available
014to answer any questions if you guys need thank you thank you District Council 50 General Contractors ibw 1186 electrical contractors uh General cont Contracting and construction plumbing and Mechanical Contractors sheet metal contractors uh s Su hero electric anyone else is wishing to testify good morning Mr chair Vice chair and members of the committee my name is Cliff La boy Iron Workers Union stabilization fund uh I believe all those contractors that you just called out are opposed to this bill we are strongly in opposition of this bill we have one one question we want to ask you know uh the state thinking about doing stuff like that why don't they get a hold of the building trade Council let's sit down talk about this instead of being here wasting everybody's time we got a procurement process
015in place that's been in in there for over 30 years to prevent fraud and a whole lot of other things they understand that uh I'm pretty sure we can sit down and work things out if they come to the table thank you for your time thank you anyone else wishing to testify one more I have a question uh do and Mr seeno so for DT uh first um is there a type of issue that DT is attempting to address with this and then did has DT reviewed some of the testimony in opposition and does your uh testimony address some of the concerns from those in opposition yes so overall um do doesn't support the overall exemption to to procurement from our perspective it's over Brad in in in its approach for us what we're trying
016to do is make sure that we can move forward on different types of procurement and the procurements that minimize the impact to the procurement cod we're looking at cmgc we select the contractor and the and the engineers in the same way we do right now the only difference is it'll this legislation would allow with 103 405 that's adjustment that we're looking at would allow a contractor who works on the design to also win the project that's the change so we they still got go through the selection process they still got to make sure that they they give us a price a maximum guaranteed price that we can accept and if not we'll just bid it out so we have controls in there to ensure that we minimize the potential for the state to um to
017pay more than it should um and um make sure that we can move a lot faster the biggest thing for with cmgc there's that's being used in the five other states that are running it now and the federal government who's accepted it as an accelerated procurement process um that they're they're asking all the states to consider is they see a lot more innovation in the process right now when we go through our normal processes we get a designer that works on it as the designer we put it out the construction where we find a whole bunch of issues that we got to go through in our normal design bid build process during that process if the contractor helps us revise that design and make it better we pay half of of that cost so we
018don't get to benefit that on that from the beginning if we go through design build um processes it's a it's a better process because we can start working with the contractor at that time but in general in that process the designer works for the contractor so I cannot tell the designer this is what we want this is what we need as long as it fulfills the requirement of the RFP that we put out a contractor can do it and I'll give you a case in point when we did our walu Viaduct project and we did our pre-cast concrete panels out there we I mean the contract did a great job out there when we started looking at the Gap width on on Those portions we wanted it to be at a half an inch because
019of the specifications the contract could tell their engineer to just give me a justification that two Ines Works in here and they could do it and still fulfill a contract in general we would have to pay more to make sure that we get it built in the way that we see from a maintenance perspective so those are the adjustments that are being made in addition to that when we start looking at the new bridges that we're trying to do on the big island especially on the Hoku Coast they're big they're tall they're long when we bid out those projects Innovation up front during the design process we'll save a whole bunch of money we just B out project a project on on the big island was supposed to be $85 million when the contractors bid
020on it it came out to about 170 million because they saw things that are designers because they're not contractors because they don't have the means the same means and methods as the contractors out there um didn't see but when it came in and because the contractors were all pretty close in price I mean they're right so if we had that up front to make sure that we could capture that in design and hopefully make it better from the beginning we could have captured not only the um a shortage of time frame in bidding it out but also a better product that's what we're trying to get to and then for Mr seino have you looked at Dot's testimony and does that address some of the concerns that you have uh we we did and um
021so we had concerns with the exemption to construction and I think they addressed that um but then I have a board to have to report to and I I'm at the 11 hour I I am not able to um convene in the board and and and but it is better than the previous Tru well yeah it it's it's better than we we you know I I know there's an intent and we we uh I we're waiting to work with uh Mr sniffin and um the do and to but I wouldn't be able to agree to anything until I seen it thank you Mr and get the approval go Ed um shouldn't then you be doing a better job at the RFP level and making sure that you cover everything that you want instead of leaving
022it so broad that the better job that we're trying to do is get a Contractor on board overall there's no engineer in the state that has the construction capacity that a contractor does even if they had construction experience and there's several const um Structural Engineers who have contractors on in their staff but those contractors are no longer no longer have the means and methods to do the work so they if we have a Contractor on board during the design process they can tell us exactly what is constructible what's not what areas we need an access road what areas we need false work to be put in rather than assuming things from the beginning when the designers reach out the contractors during the design period the contractors will not share information and then rightfully so because
023that's going to be their their their B Advantage have a consultant contractor contractor during the design phase that's what we'd like but if we pay the consultant contractor during the design phase they cannot bid on the construction work that's what we're trying to that's what we're trying to get through with this with this 103d 405 change if they can bid on the construction work then we get more available right now those that that would be willing to work with us would be the smaller contractors because they cannot win the work anyway there's so many contractors I would think there'd be others I mean if they want the job to do the initial then there's other contractors out there that could bid does this lead to favoritism though I I don't see it because we got
024to go through the same selection process when we select that contractor up front for the design period we got to go to the selection process okay thank you okay thanks um Ed um is there any impact to pla agreements that's already in statutes no impacts no impacts okay I I have a question for procurement board or procurement office thank you okay question for procurement board um what what's the can you explain what procurement policy board and the makeup no wait what does that have to do with the bill though well I think Ru making is the authority of the board no so the way how the testimony is now before the dot director can even do any of this he still needs explicit approval inwriting from the SPO so if the SPO finds that hey
025you know what I think that this is too flexible or too too out of the box she can she's going to probably deny it she she has to be proactively in writing approv the specific process that the do director would do well the question is have the PO have the procurement policy board got a hold of this bill I can't answer that question right now I'm sorry thank you yeah because they have meetings well how often do they meet they're actually meeting right now but how often do they meet oh um so listen to the question and answer the question how often do they meet um they meet I think uh by I'm not exactly sure but the previous meeting was weeks ago okay thank you okay any further discussion I got quick quick U
026procurement office please so can you provide examples of when you have a construction project for which procurement by competitive means is either not practical or not advantages to the state currently construction is not exempt from the procurement code so I don't have any examples but I can take this back to check with the chief procurement officer and get back to the committee sir yeah and do is saying that they're not including Construction in this either okay so this yeah about design bless you bless you bless you okay any further discussion okay if not chair's going to recommend to pass with amendments we're going to remove the current context of the HD1 and adopt the language from the G testimony to limit the types of contracts that qualify for this exemption we're going to limit this
027to only do we're going to add a two-year Sunset to this section and we're going to require a written report to the allege 30 days after the first year of implementation and then we're going to add a new um we're going to insert language to aand 103d-102 a so that project management may not be procured under this section and in insert a definition for project management to 103 d-104 for the purposes of this section any other discussion if not chai for HB 1155 Shai Vice chai Senor aino icoy ior elante with reservations Hashimoto hi sen Ino reservations Sen kuha Senator kidani hi Senator Kim hi Senator Lee excuse Senator Wai reservations okay recommendation adopted okay uh committee and government operations uh before we get the recommendation I have a lot of concerns with this bill
028however I think the changes of this bill particularly limiting it only to dot only for a couple of years will allow the do to embark on this new type of procurement uh that may help with the federal government um so but given that give all of these changes I feel good about recommending that we have further discussions on that so with that um Senate draft one I vote Yes voting on HB 1155 HD1 sen um chair's recommendations to pass with Amendment Senator Gabbert is excused Senator Mory Walky I um I vote with reservations Senator favella reservation Fair recommendation has been adopted thank you hey calling to order the 10: a.m. agenda first item House Bill 476 recommendation is to pass but amendments adopt lrb Tech amendments increasing the rate from 7.25 to 8% any discussion
029ch um I have a concern with this capital gains tax increase pertaining to individuals and no different that those seniors who want can you hold on for yeah this is a hearing I thought it was M okay don't thank you Realtors P apple seed my name is B Thomas good morning speaking on behalf of apple seed in support of this measure capital gains overwhelmingly go to the wealthiest taxpayers in Hoi um it's close to 80% of the long-term capital gains are accured to those earning over $400,000 a year so the capital gains rate the current maximum is a is a giveaway to wealthier taxpayers who pay a lower rate on capital gains compared to the regular income um in addition with the income tax cuts or the income tax adjustments that were passed last year
030it's only appropriate that the capital gains rate be adjusted as well to match those changes um for those reasons and as well as the fact that the alternative capital gains rate is another giveaway to to corporations we believe that the capital gains rate should be raed and in the future we would strongly encourage the legislature to consider um taxing capital gains at the same rate as ordinary income to close the loophole entirely and make sure that the tax system is um is fairly considered and what rate is it um right and ideally for us it would just be no not for you basic statement yes what percentage should that for example if you're in the 11% tax bracket you would be taxed at 11% for your capital gains that's what we believe is fair any
031further questions thank you thank you Hawaii food industry Association Next Foundation children Action Network oh sorry about that had had a button problem there Tom yamach for tax Foundation good morning chair Vice chair members of the hear you uh how about now a little better volume volume okay thank you very much chair Vice chair members of the committee Tom yamach for tax Foundation uh we'd be happy to stand on a written testimony and be available for questions members questions okay thank you Hawaii action Hawaii children's Action Network hoha chair Vice chair members of the committee um my testimony starts on page 17 of your packet um that's online um Hawaii is one of only nine states that has a capital gains tax loophole this tax loophole is one that benefits the wealthiest people in Hawaii
032um it allows uh income from things like selling your stocks your bonds art your antiques to be taxed at a lower rate than the income tax that we all pay on regular work so we're just trying to close that loophole according to the Department of taxation's annual report on income tax statistics capital gains are heavily concentrated in the high end of the income distribution especially for non-residents they say that more than half of the income of nonresidents who pay taxes here in Hawaii more than half of their income is in capital gains so this is a way to get more money from from high income tax non-residents um Warren Buffett has said over the years that for the federal capital gains tax loophole he's never seen a relationship between the capital gains tax rate and
033business investment um and there's a chart in my uh testimony that goes back all the way to the Great Depression almost a hundred years ago with capital gains tax rates and real investment and you can see there's no um effect of the capital gains tax rate because we're really just trying to tax all income at the same rate um we also suggest that instead of picking a flat rate um to tax capital gains we simply just tax that the same rate as regular income we have a bill s SP 349 that has that language and also during a prior session Department of Taxation also recommended that and I put that in my testimony finally um there was a bill that uh would have put capital gains uh tax rates at the same income a few
034years ago an analysis from The Institute on Taxation and economic policy found that that bill would draw 97% of its income of its revenue from people in the top 5% of the income scale so especially with some budget concerns coming this seems like a very targeted way to get some more revenues in thank you please support this than you League of Women Voters Democratic Party Chamber of Commerce AFL CIO Grassroots Institute act uh activities and attractions Hawaii Alliance for Progressive action I know Chamber of Commerce for Maui okay um we have many individuals was testifying um 22 in support and 254 individuals oppos anyone else wishing to testify uh chair yeah go ahead Michael Galu uh pronoun heem president of private work Hawaii we stand in strong support of this measure uh we uh support
035all everything that Nicole woo had to say that it is time for us to close these loopholes we need to make we need to level the playing ground and so we encourage you to pass this bill with the Amendments as laid out by Nicole woo Mahalo thank you okay next item I have a question here for who um well my question is for who first well text offic okay do text this bit Bill does not exempt uh local people individuals as kpuna who wants to downsize their properties and move into assisted living so it affects everybody is Am I Wrong uh the bill does not contain an exemption for that okay so the question is and I can see why there's so many oppositions because we're talking about earlier I heard people saying for higher
036higher um income brackets will have you know it's a good deal but what about the local guys wants to sell properties start downsizing the capital gains will increase you know their their proceeds so that's just a concern that I have um so it will impact everybody so there is an exemption for the sale of a primary residence under the capital gains tax um I believe currently it's 250,000 per individual 500,000 for a joint um presently we conform to the Federal on that yes so there is that to into consideration an increase though going forward for everybody for the capital gains rate but the exemption amounts will stay intact but yes this bill would change the capital gains rate can I just ask so on on the capital gains on investments or stocks I mean middle
037inome people although maybe there's a lot of highend but a lot of middle income people are trying to make invest their monies right they're getting smarter at doing that so doesn't this going to affect all the small guys as well yes so for Investments that are not um primary Resident Properties the um capital gains rate would apply to all of those types of taxpayers like on the stock market where we're trying to teach our young people about Investments and um fiscal and um financial literacy about the stock market and so forth and those that are embarking on it the small guys the the because I've got I've gotten calls from constituents that's saying you know they're not rich but they're trying to they're trying to make investments and and keep a float so this is
038going to impact them yes it would impact them thank you so just a followup I heard them testify this is about corporate uh it would this spill uh would apply to individuals and corporate okay thank you thank you shair so what Senator ke was saying what bothers me is that nowadays we have family members that is passing away giving them to their children or their grandchildren um going forward um this is going to affect them too right uh so for Inherited property if it's their primary residence um there is a separate law that would apply um because a property that's passed on does get a stepped up basis um so uh the value at the time of death is usually um what your cost basis is going to be if for example the kids later
039sell the house um so there is that to take into consideration but if the capital gains amount is um enough and it's not subject to the exemption yes these would affect those people potentially as well so so I I can't really understand what I mean yes again we're going try tax the rich we want corporate who really going to pay who really going to pay if we go after these rich people and you guys all been saying here corporate like that who really go pay us I this do potentially the poor people corporate will never pay any fair share I don't care how you want to do the loophole can you just stick to the question that we going end the pain for what we try to do with the rich that's not fail to
040the poor people are serious and that's sad okay corporate question but it's not it's not the solution not the solution chair okay any other questions if not we're going to go to next item people can get ah here houseb dox Deb good morning chair members of the committee uh thank you very much Georgia Skinner uh representing the Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism uh we did send in comments and we stand on those comments our main concerns are the message that this does send to our film industry uh who has taken advantage of the film tax credit to say that we're going to Sunset something when uh currently we're at a deficit uh because of the production industry being down sends the wrong message we are looking to build Hawaii first as a department
041Mission uh that has pillars including the tax credit infrastructure and new ways to look at managing this industry uh it is one of the bright spots for Hawaii so we are here for any other additional questions but do raise concerns especially the jobs that are currently um people are not working so we don't want to send the wrong message thank you except I don't think this bill says that um it ends indefinite so the legislature could always reenact another five years yes that's true and the legislature to review all tax credits and the effectiveness the efficiency yes that is something that I think is valid and and should be a regular process yes yeah because that that problem now where a lot of concerns specifically about your guys tax credit and how it wasn't being
042handled correctly so this allows the legislature every five years to review how the Departments are actually implementing and I think that's a good it's a good process and an excellent idea okay yatsi Democratic party island film group sag sag and we stand on our te thank you Hawaii children's Action Network hello H chair Vice chair members of the committee um again Nicole from Hawaii children's Action Network speaks um we know that Hawaii uh our state local taxes burden low-income families much more than higher income families we have the third heaviest State local tax burden in the nation um and tax credits for Working Families especially low-income families really are one of the few things bright spots that we have that helps families for to live here and we are concerned we have the renters credit
043we have the Earned Income Tax Credit food excise tax credit and some others um we're concerned that if these kinds of tax credits are um having to be renewed every five years it's not only more work for you but it also might threaten some of these tax credits if they lapse um we already have Department of Taxation doing an annual report on all the tax credits in this state um and some other um ways uh to check that these are working and that they're um being uh run efficiently so um we ask you respectfully to defer this Bill thank you the Democratic party education caucus sag home office Catholic Charities we have a number of individuals in you in support 55 oppos anybody else wishing to testify uh chair yes yeah go ahead uh Michael
044goo Jr uh president of private work Hawaii uh he him pronouned we stand in strong opposition to this bill this is using a sledgehammer when a scalpel is needed we are seeing in real time at the federal level when a sledgehammer is being used to solve our problems and it is having a devastating effect to our economy this this bill if it moves forward will have the same effect here locally as we're trying to shore up we have an economic tsunami coming at us and this bill does not help us at any way shape or form uh as already's been stated we have really good tax credits out there that should be nurtured and moved forward without worrying and that is what happens with the film tax credit if you play games with that the
045film industry will go somewhere else and we've seen that time and time again every time you all decide that it's cool to play with this because somebody doesn't like the term tax credit we the the taxpayers end up paying that price because we lose that income coming into the state do the right thing kill this bill figure out the uh find a scalpel do not use a sledgehammer mahalo you Tom go ahead thank you chair Vice chair members of the committee Tom yamach from tax Foundation uh we have some concerns about whether this bill is going to be effective at all if a later legislature for example passes a bill uh with a credit and without a phase out uh it'll be effective without a phase out so um it may be nice to have
046on paper but it's probably not going to do anything uh we also note that the state auditor uh is required to review existing income tax credits uh on a fiveyear ruling basis and um maybe that's kind of the way to go instead be happy to answer any questions thank you very much anyone else wish need to testify yeah come forward state your name good morning morning um my name is Kat Chong I'm a member of the 665 local union and I'm a local set decorator I wanted to say that I strongly oppose um that bill and I hope it's not going forward I usually work with a crew from 10 to 30 people um which includes set dressers Shoppers painters Carvers artists um we have a really great crew in Hawaii that's been working for
047many many years and um we've done very big shows like Lilo and Stitch we just worked on Rescue High Surf we really hope the show comes back um we have a lot of competition in other territories that are much cheaper that um have a different system of making films of um uh the permitting process of the unions of the tax incentives and we've seen a lot of films leaving and we are really afraid that if this bill passes we're not going to we're going to be out of work so um I also wanted to emphasize that we um give a lot of work to local businesses so we work with galleries fabric stores Drapers hotels upholsters carpet stores any stores where um uh there is um uh local produ product being sold we go and
048Shop a lot so um I think we're really welcome attribution to the community thank you okay I'm not sure if everybody read the bill before you started testifying but it says income tax credit established or renewed after December 31st 2025 so a lot of these things were established much sooner not after okay my name is is Daniel Hamilton low I'm I moved here to help produce DUI kamoh Hoff for Disney uh I worked on monar I worked on red one Moana uh and Lilo uh I'm the guy I'm the middleman between the local crew and the studios um I'm talking this year I've talked about six projects considering coming here and I can tell you that it's my opinion that not one of those projects would come without a tax incentive um and I I
049understand you're saying that this is not look to eliminate that immediately but it's talking about the the future and um this isn't a chart about uh how much money you may have here or not here this is a without a tax incentive you do not have a a film industry they they will not come California right now is talking about a 35% tax incentive and um you're barely competitive at the 22% uh and uh any conversation about switching to a grant system is just not going to apply thank you thank you okay anyone else wishing to testify thank you okay next item House Bill haima morning chair Vice chair committee James brow administrator for haima we stand on our written testimony and uh what we're asking for is a very specific um seven positions identified
050at the EMS 5 and six is what we're asking for thank you uh HG EA good morning chair Vice chair uh members new sebas here with hga uh we'll sign on our testimony in opposition to this measure thank you thank you who this is Jen only first name okay next item House Bill 1145 do Tex thank you tax Foundation uh thank you chair Vice chair of the committee Tom yamach from tax Foundation we'll stand on our testimony uh and be available for question thank you next item House Bill 1146 don't tax Kristen Sakamoto deputy director of Taxation uh thank you for hearing this bill uh we we are in support and um just very briefly it uh restores the original intent of the bill which was that it should be Revenue neutral for the state
051by uh proposing an amendment I'm available if you have any questions thank thank you thank you Tex Foundation thank you chair Vice chair members of the committee Tom yamacha for tax Foundation uh for the reasons outlined in our bill we don't think there is a current double benefit uh so we question the necessity for this bill I'll be happy to answer any questions thank you Natalie iwasa uh thank you chair um committee um oh gosh I'm so sorry I'm so nervous I did submit written testimony but I wanted to emphasize a couple of points this bill would disallow the state income tax deduction if it's paid by a pass through entity and current law actually allows a deduction for individuals if they for the state income tax so basically what's happening is instead of the
052individual paying the tax the pass through entity is paying the tax and you know we have various laws I'm sorry my camera is on the fritz we have ious laws that are different between the federal government and state and so when those differences occur um an entity partnership as Corporation will file separate returns but in this case if they do that you know it's it you can't do that I mean if you want to take advantage of the state deduction at the federal level you still have to pay it through this the Hawaii it gets reported in the Hawaii return is paid through the pass through entity and then the individual can't take the deduction so it's really an unfair situation that you would be putting um individuals in if you pass this it's just
053um in my opinion it's not it's not right to do that so thank you I'm so nervous but thank you for allowing me to testify thank you anyone else wish need to testify next bill House Bill 1147 dox tax Foundation thank you chair Vice chair members of the committee Tom yamacha from tax foundation will stand a written testimony be Avail for questions thank you anyone else wishing to testify next item hille 1173 dox thank you tax Foundation thank you chair Vice chair members of the committee Tom yach for tax Foundation uh we um believe that 15 years ago in in the 2009 legislature uh that the legislature enacted a 15year statute limitations on tax collection uh I think that means uh that after after the 15 years comes and goes and all of the you
054know tooling is accounted for uh that means the debt goes away that what do you mean when you say when you say I think does that mean you're unsure uh we believe that's what the legislature intended Al although we recognize that doax is taking a different position okay but if you're going to offer testimony I think you you don't want to keep saying I think maybe we could be we really need the facts yeah the facts are in our written testimony and uh uh and it's all there the U uh uh the committee reports and so forth and the federal case law that it's based on okay thank you we we believe that this is a warranted uh to conform ha tax law to the federal laws on which it's based okay thank you chamber
055of Commerce Richard mlen and next item House Bill udman auditor lrb ethics commission anyone else wishing to testify okay we're going to defer decision because we need to get out the next agenda um to this to uh Tuesday April 1st at uh 10: a.m. he calling to order the 1002 agenda one hour later okay first item is House Bill 126 recommendation is to pass with amendments on page 10 remove lines 19 and 20 and on page 11 remove lines one and two and reinsert the distribution percentages for allowable expenses on page 12 reinert language to allow for the payment of awards for information or assistance supplemental sums to stand to State and county law enforcement agencies expenses that are in connection with training and education and expenses related to enforcement and defect the date to
05620150 any discussion not sure voty all members present pass with amendments all members yeah all members present except for uh excuse Senator Lee and Bella any objections any reservations thank you next item house 162 recommendation is to pass unamended any discussion if not CH vot say present anyone voting no with reservation aded thank you next item House Bill 341 recommendation is to pass with amendments defecting the date to 2050 any discussion not sure second for one pass with amendments all members present anyone voting no with reservation thank you next item House Bill 396 recommendation is to pass unamended any discussion n CH say all members present anyone voting know with reservation thank you next item House Bill 398 recommendation is to pass with amendments defecting the date to 2050 any discussion not sure vot I
057um pass with amendments HB 398 all memb present anyone voting no reservation aded thank you next House Bill 428 recommendation is to pass unamended any discussion not sure pass un amended all members present anyone voting no with reservation uped thank you next item hosit 429 recommendation is to pass unamended any discussion non-chair vote sign 429 pass unamended all members present anyone voting not of reservation adopted thank you next item house Bill 431 recommendation is to pass with amendments adopt lrb Tech amendments remove the Preamble section and in section two require that Cales must have connections to Public Utilities such as water sewer and electricity and may charge monthly rents no more than 30% Ami amend section two and three so the funds are expended by the Department of Human Services instead of the office of
058the governor any discussion not Chair vot say memb present anyone voting no it's pass with amendments anyone voting no with reservation meure adopted thank you next item House Bill 432 recommendation is to pass the Amendments remove the Appropriations for fiscal year 27 and sections five and six remove the appropriation section seven for May right homes Redevelopment any discussion not sure vot I members president anyone voting no with reservation adop thank you next item house 433 recommendation is to pass unamended any discussion not sure V say all members present anyone voting no reservation aded thank you next item House Bill 454 recommendation is to passate amendments the date to 2015 any discussion not CH V say all members present anyone voting with reservation thank you next item house bill 529 recommendation is to pass unamended any
059discussion not chair Bai all members present uh pass with amendments all members pres with pass un amended all members present anyone voting no reservation is adopted thank you next item House Bill 550 recommendation is to pass unamended any discussion if not CH vot time all members president anyone voting no with reservation thank you next item hosital 643 recommendation is to passate amendments adopt lrb Tech amendments insert language on page seven line 16 that the appropriated funds shall be expended by the Department of Agriculture provided that the department of of Agriculture contracts with sear for the purposes of this act any discussion if not chair V pass with amendments all members present anyone voting no reservation aded thank you next item House Bill 714 recommendation is to pass un amended any discussion not TR s all
060members present anyone voting no reservation thank you next item House Bill 736 recommendation is to pass with amendments defecting the date to 2050 any discussion not sure vot say all members present anyone voting no reservation thank you next item House Bill 974 okay we had quite a bit of testimony with suggested amendments so we're going to defer this to April 3rd 10:02 in this room next item House Bill uh same situation we're going to defer to April 1st 100:3 in this room next item House Bill 1099 recommendation is to pass on a any discussion not Chair vot say all members pres anyone voting no reservation thank you next item off 1169 recommendation is to pass the Amendments adopting lrb Tech amendments any discussion not sure vot say all members present anyone voting no with reservation
061opted thank you next item House Bill 1187 recommendation is to pass with amendments removing references to uh flowers in the measure and inserting language into 103 d-205 to also phase in the small purchase of local lays under the same timeline uh perfect the effective date upon approval any discussion not sure V all members present anyone voting know reservation thank you next item House Bill 1260 recommendation is to pass for amendments adopt lb Tech amendments insert language so that plans are submitted directly to the director of Transportation any discussion not sure V say all members present anyone voting no with reservation thank you next item house B 1300 recommendation is to pass un amended any discussion not chai all members present anyone voting no reservation aded thank you next item Al 1406 we're going to take
062some language uh from the iron workers testimony and amend to add an individual having knowledge experience and expertise in the area of Labor any discussion not chair vac that's forend all members present anyone voting no with reservation thank you next item House Bill 1409 recommendation is to pass unamended any discussion not sure this is HP 1409 what is it 14099 1409 procedures I was looking at 14 any any further discussion on 1409 pass un amended 14 HB 1409 pass unamended all members present anyone voting no reservation aded thank you next item House Bill 1450 recommendation is to uh pass unamended any discussion not TR pass un amended all members pres anyone reservation thank you what