001Good afternoon and welcome to the Committee on Education. Uh we are on the 1:12 p.m. agenda. Today is Wednesday, March 25th. We're in room 229. And although it's the 1:12 agenda, it is 1:40. Our joint hearing uh got pushed back because other chairs are hearing other measures. Similarly, the same holds true for our 1:11 agenda that we will try to get to as soon as we can. Uh this hearing uh is being televised live on Olelo and YouTube. If technical issues occur, committee will convene reconvene on Wednesday, March 25th at 2 at 1:00 p.m. in conference room 229 and a public notice will be posted at the Hawaii State Legislature website. And due to the number of measures before the committee and the volume of testifiers, testimony will be limited to 1 minute per testifier.
002Uh The first item on our agenda is House Bill 2296, House Draft 1, relating to school meals. Reduces the amount the Department of Education is authorized to charge for school meals to all students enrolled in Department of in the department um and charge no more than 1/4 of the cost of preparing the meal. So, first up on the testifiers list, we have Keith Hayashi with the DOE. Aloha, Chair Kim, members of the committee. Shawn Tajima testifying on behalf of the Department of Education. The department stands on its written testimony with comments on this measure. Uh the department requests that the bill revert back to its original form. The original form requested that meal prices be no less than 25% of the meal cost. The amended bill changed it to be no more than 25% of
003the meal cost. The amended bill would require the department to lower current lunch prices, uh which would decrease revenue and be an increased financial burden to the state. The department prefers the language in Senate Bill 2615. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. We stand by for questions. >> again no less than is what the language you want. We prefer no less. Yes, ma'am. >> All right. Okay. And has Senate Bill uh 2615, is that moving on the House side? Yes. Well, it was heard. I believe it's moving. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next up is Wolo Kane. Aloha, Chair, uh members of the committee. Andrew Chapman, Governor's Office, on behalf of Wolo Kane. Um the Office of the Governor stands on certain testimony in support. In support of which one? Of no
004less or no more? I'm down. Okay. >> draft. The current draft? The current draft will be no more, right? Will lower the lunch prices. You better check to make sure that that's what they're doing. Okay. Nate Hicks for the Hawaii Public Health Institute. Aloha, Nate. Aloha, Chair, members of the committee. Nate Hicks with Hawaii Public Health Institute in support. Uh we saw that there was a attempt to increase lunch prices last year due to the uh current language and we support this measure to make sure that lunch prices do not rise and students are able to afford uh being able to, you know, afford meals. We do want free school meals for all K-12 and so making sure we don't raise prices would be a first step to get making sure we get there. Mahalo.
005Okay. Thank you. Lauren Zirbel, Hawaii Food Industry Association on Zoom. Lauren, I'm present on Zoom, Chair. Okay. Let's see. Geneva um Mama. Yes. Aloha, Chair, members. Um Geneva Mama Ho, Hunger Action Network. We represent over 20 anti-hunger [clears throat] focused organizations. Um we support the bill as it's written now, which is um that 1/4. So, um we do support any measure that expands access to free school meals and this would reduce um that obstacle. So, if we do actually align with the governor's commitment to universal free school meals in 5 years, if we changed it to no less than 1/2, then we would have to be back here again trying to change the rule again. So, that's why we're supporting this no more than 1/4. Um mahalo. Okay. Thank you. Let's see. Anyone else here
006wishing to testify on this measure whose name I didn't call. Okay. Members, any questions? Question. Senator DeCourcy. Uh DOE. Shawn, please. Thank you. So, the state auditor had done an audit um on the school meals and on page three, it does show that uh DOE does not have data about the cost of each component of the meals served at its schools. Without such data, the department is unable to determine what dishes or items, etc., etc. Let me just move down to the final uh specifically what ingredients within those categories provide the best opportunities to increase local food usage and spending. So, um to keep it at its your preferred language, which is not less than 1/2, um that would take us to like regardless of how the system is performing, right? And so, the no
007more than 1/4 actually prioritize prioritizes affordability and accountability. Um so, I think in conjunction with the auditor's report, it would seem more specific and direct if we do keep the no more than 1/4. Do you have a response to that? Yeah. Um so, for the regard regards to the the audit, the part that they were focusing on was um how much does each ingredient cost in every meal. So, uh even in our new system So, we do have a new system that we're starting up next year cuz we have a we finally uh set up the contract for that so you don't keep track of everything. Um I still don't think it's going to be able to calculate how much is every ingredient. But as far as the with regards to this bill, we're using
008the total cost of each meal, which is basically calculated but So, we have that number. And it's basically calculated by the total expenses, which is how much the food costs, how much milk costs, how much labor costs, and how much the equipment costs. If you add all of that up for the year, you divide that by the number of meals served, that's the that's the cost per meal. So, we we have that figure. But the part the audit is focusing on is like how much every ingredient costs in every meal. We don't have that. So, as far as the the locally sourced one, we're we're working on that. But for this purpose, we do have the cost per meal, which is a total expense divided by the total amount of meals, which is $9.05. Yeah,
009cuz the not less than 1/2 actually like the DOE is more so prioritizing flexibility in pricing, right? Where the no more than Excuse me. No more than 1/4 um actually keeps accountability over those operations. So, your plan to be more precise is based on a system that hasn't even been implemented yet. So, >> year? Uh this coming year. >> Oh, this coming year. Yeah. So, as far as the accountability, um for this one, it's I just to clarify, it's no less than 25%. Uh cuz if it was no more than 25%, we'd have to lower the current meal meal price. Yeah, excuse me. Um yeah. So, for the record, DOE is supporting not less than 1/2, 50%. >> 25%. >> Oh, 25%. Excuse me. No less than 1/2. Yes, correct. No more than 1/4 of
010the preparation cost. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. So, does that include fringe then in your 905? Or is it just pure what DOE is paying? Uh just DOE. So, you're not including the fringe benefits that goes into the meal costs? For the staff? Yeah. You don't think that's a part of the cost? >> on that. Okay. Yeah, I know it's Because because at some point it's kind of arbitrary in how you're picking that number, right? Or is there some direction on how you're coming up with that 905? And has it been consistent on how you've been calculating it? It has been. Let me let me check on that. >> Because part of it is if you you can decide some one year it's just purely the food costs, we're not even going to include personnel,
011right? And so, I think we just need to make sure that we have a handle on what it is because if you you potentially can keep changing the number. We don't know what we used to calculate if we're not sure, right? I know the the method of calculation has been consistent. But let me check on if the fringe is included. Right? Because if you include fringe, then, you know, you might the number might be off, right? So, so what what is your plan then? Because obviously, what we need to understand is how long have we been at 905, right? And how long have we been out of compliance? And based on increasing salaries plus food costs, what is your plan to increase the food prices, right? I think the board tried to do something and
012then I we haven't seen anything. But obviously, you might be out of compliance with this relatively quickly. And if we don't understand what your plan is, then we don't know what right what the right number is. If it's more, is it less, you know, in terms of what we're going to put into the bill. So, we Well, for us to to make that sound decision, we need to understand what what is your thinking, right? So, I think whether this bill passes or not will impact our plan because, like you said, there was a proposal last year, I believe, to increase it I think a quarter a year to be in compliance with the statute. Uh but we actually went the opposite way. We made more meals free. So, reduced kids are free this year and
013next year the Alice students are free. So, as far as moving forward, I think we're waiting to see what happens with this because if the ceiling is 25% we need to lower it from there. Even though food costs are going to increase. So, you're Wait, so you're planning So, depending on what the outcome is, you might lower because you want to depending on if we go up or above or below. Yes. Okay. >> Cuz the current language creates a ceiling. >> But don't But don't you know what what is your projected increase per year? Like is it 5% or is it like What What is it the historical's been of getting to that 905, right? Like What What is the increase been over the past couple of years? We were still calculating that. I can
014I can get back to you on the increase over the past several years. Because then then we can kind of know, okay, we we we know that we're we're going to calculate 5% a year, then we better make sure that the board is corresponding, making sure that that, you know, increase is happening at the board level because I don't I don't think what we want is we come back a couple years from now and you guys just didn't move the meal price and we're out of compliance and then we got to change the law to I don't know 15%, 10%, right? So, um I think part of it is is we just don't want to get into this situation ever again where we have to keep tinkering cuz I think this is year two of
015trying to change the meal price, right? So, I think I think like Senator DeCoite was saying, the creating the the baseline as 25% gives us flexibility to raise the price according to food costs. The food cost is going to go up, that's why. >> Well, and labor costs are going to go up if that's what you're calculating in. Yep. So, do you have a better handle then on the food costs because last year when, you know, your predecessor, you know, predecessor before your position was created, they weren't really sure what the cost was. So, has that changed from last year to this year and and how did you get that under control? So, the current We do have the current costs for this current year and it's basically like I shared, it's the cost of
016food, cost of milk, cost of equipment, cost of labor divided by the total number of meals. So, did we always have that because last year my recollection is we we were we weren't we weren't even sure. I can't speak for last year, but um that's the formula that we're using. Okay. So, I think we need to understand what what is what is the historical data and what is your projections cuz I think the projections is what's really important to us. Okay. Cuz we don't want to keep coming back and having to do it by statute. And the cost will go up because we're increasing our locally sourced too, so Well, but then you got to factor that into the the plan, right? And at least we we kind of understand because then we got to
017understand what is what is the cost to the state that we're going to subsidize as well. Right? And I think everyone wants to to make sure that all their kids are fed, but we just got to go in with a with a clear picture of what that looks like. Yep. Yes. All right. Thank you, Chair. Percentage that we're talking about on food, does that include like breakfast and other snacks that the schools are now giving out? Uh it's for all meals, yes. >> all meals. Okay. Um what percentage now of the students with the bills that we passed uh with free and reduced lunch now getting free meals and then next year with the Alice, what percentage of the students will we covering for free? So, currently the total number of meals that we serve
018per year um 11 million of those meals are free. >> [cough] >> 7 million are paid. And about 1 million are reduced. So, this year those 1 million meal or reduced meals are free. And then next year Let me get back to you on that. I have the figure, but um we do have the Alice students for next year. >> over with the with the reduced and the um >> [clears throat] >> the Alice? The Alice. For the the cost that's being subsidized? Yes. I believe um for this year we were allocated I'll get back to you with the exact figures, but I think it's about a million dollars for the reduced. And next year for Alice we're allocated about 500,000 for that. Okay. So, where does that money come from? Um Well, that was
019that was allocated. We allocated all of that money. Yeah. Yes. >> [clears throat] >> So, that's, you know, I know everybody wants free lunch for everybody, but somebody's got to pay. And where is that money going to come from? It's not going to come from it's going to come from K-12 somehow. It's got to come from your budget, right? And if it comes from your budget, what does that mean? Some place got to be cut. Correct. So, I hope people understand that when they're looking for free meals for everybody because it's not sustainable. You know, it's just not sustainable and with the food costs and the labor costs, it's like at home, you know, how are you going to pay for stuff? It's like, "Oh, government's going to pay." But guess what how we government
020gets the money from? From you, from the taxpayers again and, you know, businesses and so forth. So, it is a cost that has to be balanced. We want free college, we want free child care, we want free preschools, you know, and and somewhere somebody's got Somebody's budget's going to get cut, right? So, we can pay for it. And so, hopefully DOE, as you come forward, whatever you guys [clears throat] are asking for more positions, more money, free this, tell us where who you're going to cut. Agreed, Senator. I think we're not opposed to free meals or um cheaper meals, but I think we're trying to find that balance and so I think, you know, thanks for thanks to you folks uh we have money to make reduced kids and Alice kids free, but we're trying
021to find that balance and that's why we're asking for the 25% to be the base and not the ceiling. And that's why I hope my colleagues who introduced these measures and the public out there that's asking for understand that somebody's got to pay for this and the people that pay the most is the ones in the middle middle class is going to be with these bills and see that their cost of living is going to go up because we have to fund all of these services and we can't sustain it. And every time the federal government stops something because we counted on federal grants, then they expect the the state to cover it and we just don't have those funds to cover it. So, thank you. Thank you. One more question, please. Sorry, I forgot
022to mention that the audit report also found that the there is no consistent oversight in food spending at the school level and nearly $1 million in unused federal food credits over the past 2 years. Uh so, spending increase uh and there's really no safeguards. Um so, I think it's important for us to acknowledge that there needs to be some kind of parameters, some kind of boundaries, um some kind of capping um because if not, then um >> [clears throat] >> the spending just becomes a little bit more not not held to um some kind of standard. So, uh the auditor's report pretty much said it for me that right now there is no um specific plan in place and so I think that within your guys' system, if we give you folks a cap, uh
023then you folks will be forced to work within those parameters. No, they just don't come asking for the money. So, for the um the budgets at school level, that is something we're working on. We're not disputing anything in the audit. It is something that we're working on. We do have to set budgets for the schools. Um we're figuring that out because we also need our our schools to prioritize buying local too, which is more expensive. So, we're trying to find the right threshold that it's not a open blank check, but it does allow them to to purchase more local food. And the fact that you folks uh add breakfast and snacks, that's even higher cost. So, again, we're saying free lunch and there's free breakfasts and there's free after school whatever some schools give more
024do more than others, but that's all a cost, right? It's got to be considered. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? Um House Bill 13 Sorry, House Bill 1934 House Draft 1 relating to the state librarian to establish an Imagination Library of Hawaii program to provide one free book each month to children from birth through 5 years of age who reside in the state. And uh first up on this is Stacey Aldrich from the public Hawaii State Public Library. Good afternoon, G Chair Kim. Senator DeCoite uh DeCoite and uh Senator Hashimoto. Uh the Hawaii State Public Library system stands in support of the intent of this bill, which really is one of the things that we know helps kids become readers, which is having their own libraries. And so, this bill would help us make
025sure that kiki um 0 to 5 would be able to get a book every month um until they became five to build their own libraries and to build their literacy skills. Um we do um ask respectfully to um consider two things. One is um the fully funding the program for the first 2 years. As the partnering um group that we work with, we figure out how to build the the private side. So, we would be able to pay for um uh the the program. Uh so, it'd take about 2 years and then uh we would ask for about 50% um to be covered by the state. So, it'd be a public private um partnership to ensure that um the future kiki could participate in this program. And lastly, um a coordinator uh and the funding
026for this project have a coordinator who could work with this program. We have a small version of the program right now and it takes a lot of time just for about 500 kids. If you imagine with I think 80,000 kids who would be eligible for this program. So we appreciate your consideration of this bill and support of literacy in our state. Mahalo. Thank you. I know I'm all. >> [clears throat] >> Hello chair and members. I am I know I'm all executive director of Friends of the Library of Hawaii and we currently run this program in a few rural pockets of the state. We operate the entire island of Molokai, Lanai. We cover the Kau region of the Big Island, the Hana town of Hana and Maui and we cover the north and west sides
027of Kauai. And we cover those 500 some odd kids that Stacy was mentioning. This bill would expand that program statewide and it's through Dolly Parton's Imagination Library and she is a huge supporter of literacy. She has gotten the cost per book down to $2.60 per book mailed to homes every month. So that's about $31 per child. Like Stacy state librarian had requested we also as the probable non-profit partner we are not at the this moment ready to satisfy that 50% provision that's written into the current bill and so we do ask that the state does provide full funding until we are able to find private partnerships. Thank you. Thank you. Scott Eric On zoom Scott are you Not in person on zoom chair. Okay, we did have six in supportive testimonies and one opposed and
028zero comments. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? HB 1934 hearing none questions. I have a question for the library. I'm very familiar with the Dolly Parton reading program and I know about the Molokai one because of Senator DeCoite and I think it's a marvelous program. However, for having a child and having availability books does not necessarily mean that the parents will read to the child and that the child necessarily reads. So it takes a lot more than just receiving one book. Um You know every every the child at certain throughout to the age five. That's one thing. The other thing is not every student or every family needs to have a supplemental book. So can't you look at the program and see where are the areas of need so we can focus in
029on those that one the parents can't afford the books or two don't have the books instead of saying one child in the whole state because there's just not enough funding to support to continually support something like this and we have to be realistic about that. And the other area is to look at the libraries and the books that you folks probably phase out children's books. How do those perhaps those books can be utilized. So I'd hope that you folks will come back with a plan on looking at that and see how we can get a sustainable program and still meet the needs of those who really need to have this. So And [clears throat] I would just like to add though there was an an international study done in the early 2000s across 42 countries
030that two there were two things that were important for kids education and and whether or not they would be successful and one of them was having a home library. So I hear what you're saying that they may not be read to but there's also kids who parents parents might not read to them but they will read. Right. And so I think and I understand the cost. I just think when you think about the full investment in literacy this is just one one one part we can play in ensuring that not only do they start with their own libraries which will lead them into using their libraries as well. I I think it it can be a win and it's it's not as much money it's not as big of a a pocket of money that
031we would need to do this program. >> Understood. And we would hope to do it in a public private partnership so we wouldn't rely entirely on the state. >> I I I agree with you but everybody has their own little it's not that much money. It's not that much money. It's not that much money and it's continuing to add up. So I'm just trying to be realistic and let's start with those areas and perhaps within that time then you can get the private sector to come in. Because we cannot be all things. I mean you know we we're doing early childhood preschool because this is the same thing. We want them to start reading early. So hopefully that helps get that. Yeah. But but there's cost and I'm being realistic on this. >> Absolutely. Okay.
032Thank you. >> No other questions. Hearing no questions I'm going to recess and go into the joint committee with uh CPA right now. We're going to go to our 2:00 agenda item. Chuck Colway is that Okay, yeah because we are we we still have another agenda with um Sure. Waterland that is not here. So we're going to recess and then go into our 2:00 agenda item. Okay, so we are now going to start with our 2:00 agenda item starting with House Bill 2161. This is relating to pharmacy. It establishes the Daniel K. Inouye College of Pharmacy Special Fund to support pharmacist workforce assessments and planning efforts. Establishes the pharmacist workforce assessment fee and testifying on this measure starting with Ray Matsumoto for the University of Hawaii. Good afternoon. Hi we stand on our written testimony
033and I am available to answer questions. Thank you. Christopher Fernandez for DCCA Board [laughter] of Pharmacy. Good afternoon chair. The board stands on this testimony supporting the event pharmacy. Thank you. Paula Donne for Jack Lewin. Not here. Corey Saunders. Good afternoon chairs Kim Lole Corey Saunders executive director of the Hawaii Pharmacists Association. I want to thank you for hearing this measure. I'm of course going to stand on our written testimony in strong support but I want to use my time briefly to elaborate on the vision for the center and probably get ahead of some questions that you folks have for us. So unlike nursing and medicine pharmacy doesn't have a workforce assessment fee tacked into our licensure fees. I've included those proposed fees in my testimony. They've stayed stable over the past three years that
034we've introduced this bill and we've had no pushback from the profession. Even with the modest increases we're still one of the most inexpensive states to either be a pharmacist or do pharmacist business in the state and we don't see this as being a barrier to the profession across Hawaii. Secondly and most importantly being quite transparent with you folks it can be challenging to be an advocate for a profession that I love and believe in so much when we have very little workforce data. We've got no one that's collecting the number of pharmacy closures across the state. We're passing some really great initiatives more unable to report back the impact factor. So we're hopeful that we can get some more data to present to you folks and to have really used the momentum that we've garnered
035over the past couple years for our profession. I will stand by for any questions. Want to thank you again for scheduling this measure. Thank you. Kimberly Sevedin. Not here. See They are on zoom chair. On zoom please go ahead. Me [clears throat] chair? Hi this is Kimberly Sevedin. I'm actually calling from Molokai Drugs. Aloha chair Kim Keohokalole and the committees. We stand by our written testimony for the hopefully the new center for pharmacy and as was stated by previous testimony we have nothing [clears throat] like the centers for medicine and nursing and we're asking to establish a center for pharmacy in the state of Hawaii. It will not cost the state of Hawaii money. Private entities such as Molokai Drugs will be helping to pay for the center. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing
036to testify on this measure? Hearing none questions. Chair you have any questions? Okay, I I do. So perhaps So I understand um what you're saying about the workforce development and comparing it to the nursing as well as physicians but the pharmacy do you have any um documented shortages because my understanding and my research so far is that that the pharmacist and does not face the same kind of shortages as as nurses and doctors. Mhm. Because the only data that we're operating off of is the data that the DCCA has collected. So we have data on how many pharmacies and pharmacists are on each island but that's it. I actually think Ray Dean Ray might be better proposed or better posed to answer that question. I know she's been tracking national shortages and there's some upcoming
037pharmacy shortages in the next decade. Yeah, but the data shows that there's more localized and distribute distribution based um concerns without clear defined statewide um shortages. Also, our pharmacy school is far from even being at its maximum enrollment. >> Mhm. Um the enrollment is low and there's a lot of issues about that. Um the fact that it's on Hilo and there's not a lot of clinical work that can be done. They have to come to Honolulu. And so the enrollment at the pharmacy school is is down. Mhm. Half the students come from the mainland. They don't stay here. So there's a there's a lot of issues and surrounding this and I noticed that the fees that you folks are putting on um $100, right? Is that what you're >> every 2 years, so $50 every
038year. And right now it costs me $90 to practice pharmacy in the state. >> for a wholesale prescription drug distributor, $200 for each new and renewed pharmacy permit, $200 for each new and renewed permit. These are even higher than than the the nurses and the doctors. So 100 a year, so we're biennium um renewal fees, so 100 a year. And um even with those increases, I'm telling you it is so expensive to conduct the business in other states. Uh right now the other entities like wholesale manufacturers and the miscellaneous permits, I mean in other states it's four or $500 and we're close to 100 or $200. So even with those increases, it still places us towards the bottom of licensure fees. Um what I can say about the workforce data and like I said, Ray
039can better speak to the questions and the the comments that you had created around the university. We are seeing a lot of gaps in specialty pharmacy practice. So as we're advancing what pharmacists can do across the state, I mean we can be board certified in oncology, geriatrics, infectious disease, all these different positions. It is really, really difficult for us to fill those positions um especially the that have advanced training. And so as we continue to expand our scope, that's the data that we're also hoping to collect is where can we um localize and where can we position our workforce based off those data. I haven't seen any data about um pharmacist shortages in the state, but we're also like I said, not collecting data. We only have the number of pharmacists per state on each
040island. So I wouldn't confidently say um in either direction because cuz I don't think the data exists at the moment. Right. And and it doesn't seem to be the demand. Like I said, talking about the pharmacy school and and number of students that you know that is going into it and if the demand is there and I know we built the pharmacy school um at one point where there seemed to have been a shortage and all the other universities also did it and they some of them are doing it cheaper, they're more convenient and therefore our pharmacy school has been lacking as far as students and enrollment. What I can say is that's a trend across the country is that pharmacy enrollment is down trending. Um it is also not very advantageous to practice pharmacy
041in Hawaii because we haven't had a lot of these progressive measures that are involved in our scope of practice. So students are going to other states because in our sister states like California and Washington, you can write prescriptions for certain initiatives, you can practice at the top of your license. We are not practicing at the top of our license. So we're hoping that this center would take on federal and state funding and finally coordinate some of those initiatives to make the pharmacy profession more progressive and to expand some of the opportunities for pharmacy in the state here. Um I will say anecdotally right now, Kaiser I think has 10 open positions for pharmacy. Queen's had to pull two positions recently because not enough specialty pharmacist supplied. Um so again, I understand about your concerns with
042the data, but I'm not seeing data that points in either direction. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> And >> [clears throat] >> Um and like I said, Ray can really attest to some of those national trends better than I can if you would like to speak with us as well. >> any other entity that could take this on rather than the school of pharmacy itself? So it is really hard for the state association. My position is only funded a couple days throughout the legislative session and it's a grant that's not sustainable. So we're hopefully hopeful that this is an actual sustainable model. Um the university, we don't want this to be an extension of the university even though the flow of funds goes from the DCCA to UH. This would be a completely independent entity.
043So to answer your question, no, the state association could not take this on. Right. So so how do you ensure that you know, it's not an extension of the pharmacy and it's its its own thing if if they're going to you know, the money's going to them? >> Mhm. Yeah, there's a couple ways we could go about that. Um nursing, they have a governor appointed board. I think with just one FTE, we didn't want to necessarily go down that road right now, but if that's something that you guys are interested in putting in to hold us accountable, that's fine. Um we would go through the typical UH higher higher uh process and we would include um stakeholders like the Board of Pharmacy, like the Hawaii Pharmacists Association, different stakeholders throughout the profession to make sure
044that it is an independently governed entity even though So under under the current proposal, who would have who would what would be the governance structure then? Uh a board, a through In this bill, it allows for a board, but I thought you I thought there was no board yet or is it not gubernatorially appointed? Is that what you're saying? We didn't put it in the in statute, but if it's something that we want to include in statute to hold us accountable, we're happy to do that to appoint a board that has >> [clears throat] >> different professions and but absent that, what what is the governance structure you know, because you only you said you only have one FTE, so what how is it that you're going to hire this person in the interim Mhm.
045when we don't have that board? Mhm. Um I think Ray might be better positioned to answer that question. Our thought would be that it would go through the typical UH higher process and um I've been a part of committees, selection committees where you have outside stakeholders that are involved in that process as well. >> who ultimately gets hired than the Dean at that point because they're you're administratively attached or That would be a question that Ray could answer better than I could. I would assume that it would be up to the entire board, not just the Dean, a Dean appointed position. What what Board of Regents? >> The Oh, no, I'm sorry, the selection committee. Okay, so we're unclear then on the governance and what it's going to be used for then. No, I wouldn't
046say that. The selection committee, we would go through the the process at UH and have a selection committee that has stakeholders that are involved with the university, but also outside stakeholders. >> not in the statute though. And then the Where is it? No, that's not in the statute. >> [snorts] >> Um and then the governing board would be outlined in constitution and bylaws that includes pharmacists from every sector of the profession and then some outside stakeholders too for medicine and nursing to make sure that it's well-rounded to position to meet the needs of the state. >> Okay, so potentially it could get caught up in the UH bureaucratic system if we're not careful then. Mhm. But I'm more than happy to to work on amendments that have those outlined as this bill hopefully continues. Sure.
047You're welcome. Um one more question. So have you folks um surveyed your current pharmacists about these fees? Mhm. Yeah, we have been um advocating for this the past 3 years at our annual meetings. I also do multiple policy updates to our association throughout the year. I couldn't have We haven't sent out a survey, but we've not received any pushback at any of those meetings >> Well, I got I got a couple of calls. And there there was a testimony I guess given to the house who said that they're licensed pharmacists for 20 years and that they are few suggestions to remove the proposed workforce assessment fee from the individual pharmacist pharmacist bi-annual renewal fees, limit the scope of the use of the money's collected to workforce assessment and scholarships, exclude student loan repayment use. I
048guess that has been taken out. I didn't see that in the bill. Um in my personal experience, there's not a pharmacist shortage like we are experiencing for physicians. Take a look at local pharmacist job listings, there are very few. That has been the case in my 20 years of practice. Rural area shortage have more to do with the cost of living issues and pay that is not competitive. Furthermore, increasing the number of clinical training sites and expanding the scope of practice for pharmacists will produce better trained and more competency for pharmacy professionals as well as fill in the gaps where these health services are lacking. So there is some issues with some of the pharmacists now. Um so I hope that you folks will, you know um >> [clears throat] >> be more mindful of
049of your pharmacists. Sure. Yeah, I guess my only thought is that again, we're practicing not towards the top of our license here. So as we continue to use this center to push more progressive initiatives and to collect more data to hopefully come back with cases for you folks. I think that that's one of the biggest roles of the center is to talk about opportunities for the profession to expand our um abilities across the workforce to be in different care settings. Well, what comes first? Do we the the need and the demand and then the data you know, so charge them first and then get the data and find that maybe it wasn't it's not needed. Yeah, so Understood. And then the last thing I want to say, I'm sorry, I'm taking so much time. I
050I feel like there's not a proactive pharmacy entity on a lot of different boards across the state. So we're very lucky. We have some awesome partnerships with ship done with the university where they're an extension of our voice, but there's not a pharmacist sitting on the rural health transformation program deciding board. There's um an initiative moving this year that has to do with state planning and development and vaccinations and pharmacists don't have representation there. So our association is completely voluntary aside from my position during session that's just grant funded and not sustainable. And so we're hopeful that if we do get the center for pharmacy, we can finally have a a proactive voice at a seat at the table at a lot of these state discussions where pharmacists' voices are left out at the moment.
051Members, any other questions? Hearing none, thank you. Okay, we will recess this um Call back to order the joint committee on education and committee on consumer commerce and consumer protection. The chairs have um come to decision for House Bill 2161 and House Draft 3 relating to pharmacy. Our recommendation is to go ahead and amend this to further defect the date to July 31st, 2020 55 and the any technical and non-substantive amendments for clarity and consistency be made. The measure already contains blank appropriation amounts and a defective date and effective date. So, with that, the chair will put into the committee report some of the concerns that was raised so the next committee can review that issue as well. And so, with that, members, any discussion, any questions? Hearing none, the chair votes I for committee
052on education. HB 2161 HD3 chairs, I'm going to issue a pass for the amendment. Chair votes I. Vice chair is excused. Senator Fukunaga is excused. I vote I. Senator DeCourt. Chair recommendations adopted. Thank you. CPN, same recommendation. Passing with amendments. Chair votes I. Members, we're voting on HB 2161. Recommendation of the chair is pass with amendments. Noting the excused absence of Vice Chair Fukunaga and also Senator Awana. Anyone present wanting to vote with reservations or no? Hearing none, chair, your recommendation is adopted. >> Thank you. Thank you, chair. Okay. Um Do we know if Chair from Water Land is available? We just started. Okay, you guys >> [clears throat] >> Okay. Okay. So, we're going to go back. IT Well, chair, we are still currently live on YouTube. We're not finished with the agenda. Okay,
053we're still in. We will continue where we left off and where where did we left off? Okay. Okay, we got through with the libraries. Okay. We are on House Bill 2567 House Draft 1 relating to education. Establishes the early childhood education investment special fund and the testifier on that one >> [clears throat] >> Yukol, are you call her cross cross? >> [clears throat] >> Not here. Malia Souza for Hawaii Children's Action Network in support. Randall John Francisco in support. There is no one here. Anyone here want to testify on this measure? There's no one here wanting to testify. There's nobody we can ask any questions of. So, with that, we'll go into decision making on this item. Okay. House Bill 2296 House Draft 1. This is the school meals. Members, the recommendation is to substitute
054Senate Bill 2615 language into this measure and delete the the the House version and put in the Senate version. And then we will further defect the date to July 31, 2055. And the Senate bill puts in no less than 25% language that was already in that bill. Just [clears throat] so the public's understanding where we're at. Then any discussion, members? Chair, I just I just hope that they will get us the historical information soon. Right. It's a little late. land, right? So ordered. Chair votes I. HB 2296 chairs, we're going to issue a pass for the amendment. Chair votes I. Noting excused of Senator Kidani and Fukunaga. I vote I. Senator DeCourt. Chair recommendations adopted. >> Okay, thank you. For House Bill 1934 House Draft 1 relating to libraries. You know, I think that this
055imagination program is a good one, although there are concerns with the cost and you know, looking at who really will benefit by it. So, I am going to continue to allow this measure to move forward to Ways and Means some technical and non-substantive amendments that may be needed. The blank the appropriation amount is blank and I'm going to further defect the date to July 31, 2055. But I really urge the library to come in with a plan that may be sustainable and that we're targeting those areas like we are right now with Molokai and some of these other areas because we have to start to be mindful of >> [clears throat] >> you know, what we can afford and what we can do and how we're going to the future on this. I I believe
056firmly on literacy and helping our students. But again, just because you have a library at home and we have a library at home and tell you, after my son reaches a certain age, they don't look at those books at all. They're on their devices. So, maybe we have to send them audiobooks or something. But we really have to keep up with the times and I think that we need to look into the future and how we do this. So, but having said that, recommendation is to amend. Any discussion, members? Hearing none, chair votes I. Members, HB 1934 chairs, we're going to issue a pass for the amendment. Chair votes I. Noting excused of Senator Kidani and Fukunaga. Any members voting with reservations or no? With all those voting I, recommendations adopted. Okay, and with that,
057we have adjourned. >> have one more, right? Oh, one more. I thought I just did that one. Okay. Okay, sorry about that. House Bill 2567 House Draft 1. This is establishes the early childhood education investment special fund. There was nobody here to testify on this measure. So, I am going to recommend we defer. Okay. Unless anybody has any opposition. Okay, with that, we are adjourned and we will that our chair only now arrived. I've been here all the time. >> [laughter] >> Thank you very much for your patience. [clears throat] We're convening the committees on education and Water Land Culture and the Arts. Appreciate everyone's um uh consideration while we had multiple other agendas in the other room. I apologize. Up first on this measure is HB 2592 relating to the Mauna Kea Stewardship Oversight
058Authority. I'll note we have everyone's written testimony, so to the extent that we can be very concise, it would be appreciated. Um we'll be limiting folks to 1 minute to make sure we can get through all the testifiers. But up first is the Department of Land and Natural Resources. Good afternoon, chairs and members. Um we sent over our written testimony. However, I did want to clarify one point. So, after we submitted our testimony, um I did find out that there are certain conditions within the CDUP that may not necessarily be applicable to only the observatories. I think there are some things that are UH specific. So, in those cases, you would need to go back to the Board of Land and Natural Resources and get those CDUPs amended for the conditions to be applicable. Thank
059you. Testifying next is the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority. Chairs, vice chairs, committee. John DeFries, executive director of the authority. We submitted testimony and stand by our testimony. Thank you. Attorney General. Good afternoon, chairs, vice chairs, members of the committees. My name is Tina Tsuishina. On behalf of the Attorney General's office, we submitted the testimony with respect to three concerns. Um I'll be available for testifying. Thank you. Um That's everyone who signed up to testify. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Thank you, chairs, please. Chair, members of the committee, Greg Chun, University of Hawaii. I'm here to stand on our testimony and available for answering questions. Thank you. Anyone else? Going once, going twice. Okay, seeing none. Are there questions? Sure. Good evening. Thanks. Um for the AGs. Thank you.
060I know there's a lot there to unpack. I'll probably be doing some follow-up after the fact to sort through some of this. But in short, the biggest first thing I wanted to just touch on was recommendations in everyone's testimony that touch on the CDUP and whether or not um as that follows the land, that should be specifically cited in the measure or not. And with DLNR's comments, I think you heard from the prior testifier, there are other things apparently that may not be necessarily specific to the telescopes and um MK Solar, could you speak to that? So, I believe it's um I think the general proposition that CDUP is run with the land and that it runs with the use that the CDUPs permit to the property. So, without a CDUP, the uses will not
061be permissible. So, and the fact So, the fact that, you know, even though they're If the conditions are not met, then someone would need to be responsible for the conditions to be complied with, or else they won't be authorized. So, technically, even if um a permitted is not named, someone with a land interest, presumably the state agency with the management and control of the property, may be um liable for compliance with the conditions. Does that make sense? We'll have to follow up on that. >> Okay. >> [laughter and clears throat] >> Um secondly, uh to your other point on some of the liability and Yes. >> um other things that you mentioned in your testimony, um there's obviously a complex situation laying out here. Is there uh any Are there any other specific recommendations for
062how to resolve that that were not mentioned in your testimony that might apply? I believe that, you know, our comments were made a bit broadly so we can understand stand the scope of the waiver from liabilities that that is being um sought out. If we just didn't think that, you know, as written, the waiver would have the effect that may have been intended if it was really broad, and that they may need to be limited in order to um have the intended effect. Sounds like we're going to have a robust discussion in a follow-up meeting. I'll just follow up, chair. So, as far as the claims and the liabilities, was that in the original Original language to the act? >> Yes. I believe so. Okay. So, Oh, I mean, to the bill. No, no, to
063the Is this the Is this the language that is in the act now? >> I don't believe so. It's not in the act. Okay. Um because I was going to raise why wasn't this raised earlier if we we did pass the measure [snorts] if this in fact was the original language not in the measure. From our office, I can't We can't really provide a definitive reason why it wasn't raised earlier, but I can assure you, you know, there have been a lot of people keeping an eye on this, and I think our office reassessed our approach, and we're just grateful for the opportunity to provide comments at this time. Okay, can you just go back and and then get back to us on whether or not this is existing language or not in the act?
064>> Mhm. Um Okay, I think I have other questions. I was just Sure. Let me um Thank you. Uh let me switch over real quick to Thank you. Uh okay, so if you would, switch, please. Thank you, chair. Thank you. Uh in your guys' testimony, um you'd also referenced some of these things, in particular the CDUP um uh issue uh in a in the event that we let the CDUPs run with the land, are there any other adverse I don't know, outcomes or impacts or anything else? It What's the What's the risk of doing that? Is there a risk? From from the outset, there's been a concern about being the permit holder and having oversight and enforcement over that permit. And so, the position that we took was to distance that, right? And effectively, it
065does run with the land from BLNR to the authority to the sublessee, right? So, could we make it work? Yeah, I realize how delicate a situation it is, and there are um Was that a yes answer to can we make that work? You know, we're we're right now co-managing with the Mauna Kea um Center for Mauna Kea Stewardship. So, while we would like to see the CDUPs, that's still our position, but if this committee decided to uh amend that, we'd have to work with it. Whatever that fallout is. Thank you. Yeah. So, do we Do you folks have your plan and everything I I know you've been working on this, but where are you at in the whole process? The We are right now in we contracted our uh management plan creation back in July,
066and it's scheduled to be uh completed in October as the final deliverable, which then will uh trigger several months of vetting by the authority itself. But the actual uh plan deliverable is scheduled for October 2027. Uh 2026, excuse me. And as far as all the transition, has that has that occurred in the university? Has everything been transferred? You know, we currently are in a joint management committee with the Center for Mauna Kea Stewardship. Uh we've got multiple tracks going relative to the transition. One of the major ones is the legal analysis of all the assets, contracts, uh agreements. Uh that scope of work is nearing completion. Uh both Dr. Chun and I are in possession of a a draft report that needs to be vetted by both sides. And but my sense is we're within
06760 days of completing that aspect of it. Um we're also doing a a uh transition looking at ways to accelerate the transition of the staff >> [clears throat] >> uh to make a full completion of staff transfers by July 1 of 2027, or 12 months before the uh the effective date of it. So, there are multiple tracks at work right now relative to that. The two biggest ones being the assets and uh the staff. Go ahead. Uh thanks. Just switching gears just for a moment on um the question of lease extensions. Um several prior bills this session have contemplated extending for a period of 10 years uh various leases and so forth for some of the properties. Um the AGs had recommended uh in the last measure basically requiring that process to start without by
068statute and force of the law forcing that extension. Um is that something that's been debated by the or talked about by the uh You know what? We've completed in the last year and a half uh 16 meetings in the community uh primarily on Hawaii Island and then on each major island. I would say that a blanket 10-year automatic extension um would I think jeopardize a lot of work that you guys have put in, the university has put in. I just think there would be a reaction to an extension of that that length. Now, I thought that the the amended started in bill 2593, uh where the authority was given um the responsibility of granting up to 10 years uh and could be handled on a case-by-case basis, made more sense. Uh but I am concerned
069that >> [clears throat] >> from our vantage point, an automatic 10-year extension is problematic. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions for us? How How How realistic is it that you folks are going to When do you have to have this all done by? What's our deadline? July 1, 2028. So, [clears throat] we are in month 33 of a 60-month uh transition period. Okay, and how realistic is that these are going to all be completed, and at that time that you folks the authority is going to be ready up and running to be able to take over this whole responsibility? Because what I'm hearing is that the confidence of that happening is very low. Comprehensive management plan will be completed. Um Administrative rules will not. Uh that'll require more time. When you say more time,
070how much time? That I would say like 18 to 24 months beyond that. Why? Um I mean, you folks have had years working on this, so why is it going to take another 18 to 24 months? We will uh we're in the process of finalizing a drafting an RFP uh to initiate that, but it'll the degree of community engagement is going to require um that added time, which is one of the reasons why we're advocating the use of the existing plans and rules until such time the authority can adopt its own set of new rules going forward. Functioning at the joint management community level, we are already operating within that premise as well. So, the rules, the plans begin to supplant what's there currently once they're adopted by the authority. So, why is it taking
071you this long to even start to go out for the RFP? Um You know, I don't really have We've been focused on a range of things that um that this sequence of starting at this point is what it is. I mean, I I wish I could turn the clock back, but um Okay, so if you could turn the clock back, what would you have done? You know, if you if you could um turn it back, well, let me let me say this. The None of us at this stage are convinced that extensions are completely necessary, okay? But having that as a tool in the event we do require it would be >> Extension of what? The This is extension of the authority. The uh extend The power to extend the leases born given to the
072authority. Yeah. So, how does that You're welcome to come forward. This is folks at the table. John Komeiji, um chairman of the Mauna Kea Authority. Thank you. Um let me add something to the question about the rules and regs. The rules and regs can only be started to be developed after we adopt the master plan. The master plan has to be the the focus. You cannot create rules and regs without a master plan. So, the fact that our master plan is not going to be ready till October is People can start drafting it, but based upon the community input, and you know how how much input you have to get on rules and regs. So, that's one of the the reasons why we cannot start on the rules and regs until we adopt the master
073plan. It doesn't make sense to start doing the rules and regs before you adopt the master plan. So, the RFP that you're being worked on, right right now, is that what it's on right now? Yes. So, what is the RFP asking for? The creation of a new set of administrative rules, uh part of which would be evaluating the existing set of rules, and also doing an assessment of other institutions and agencies that are working in sensitive areas that have high cultural standards, uh Ka'ohelo being one of them, uh Pu'u O Mahuka Heiau being another example. Uh so >> are existing, so what stops you from doing those assessments? I mean, you know, that's what I'm trying to get a handle of it. Yes, you need your master plan, but in the meantime, you you need
074to do these assessments and so forth. And if you're hiring a consultant to do that, why is it dependent upon the master plan at this point? At some point it's going to come to the way. Yeah. I mean, you folks have been working on this for years, and I've been saying that you guys got to move quicker. So, I still don't understand why you're not why you haven't started on these assessments already. Well, I think the chair makes the point that this is sequenced around the timing of our plan. We don't have to have our management plan completed, but based on the input, we can start to initiate this, which we are. Well, I would think that you would have the assessments and all that whole question ready and waiting. So, that as soon as
075our master plan or whatever, but to say, "Okay, we're going to do this. Now we're going to go this and it's and it's over here." When you could have had that part done, so that portion can be completed almost simultaneously, but now you're still going to go over all the gathering of the data to to even start. Or that can be done during this period while you're waiting for your master plan. Right? I mean, that's the kind of steps and that's the kind of management that seems to be lacking by the authority. Noted. Thank you. Okay. All right. Okay. Chair, any further questions? Yeah, you got it, please. Thank you, chair. Okay. Thank you. There's no further questions. Next, we'll follow up offline with everyone. Okay. Thanks, everybody. Um Noting time is short, we'll move
076on to HB 2437 relating to arts education. Um On this, I think there was one testifier signed up on Zoom, Lili Pack. They are not on Zoom, chair. Okay, that's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else wishing to testify? Seeing none, uh there's no desk questions up, so with that, uh we'll go into decision-making. Okay. Uh beginning with HB 2592 relating to the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority. We'd like to move this forward with amendments. Um First of all, like to uh adopt the LRSC clarifying amendments on uh MKSOA's um ability to hold [clears throat] property. Secondly, um while we won't um require uh leases to be extended for 10 years, we'll um include the language from uh previously uh moved out of this body uh in HB 2593, which
077um is a directive to get that conversation going. Um we'll add in the language also um relating to reversion um upon uh completion or non-completion of the transfer by date certain. However, um not due to the conversation that we had here in this room today about um process and timing, but solely because of um the let's say uncertainty within some federal agencies, uh we'll uh make that threshold for that drop-dead point um additional 18 months out to December 1, uh 2029. Um uh which then will mean things uh revert back um per the the schedule in question um by um Finally, uh we'll note in the committee report um uh we'll ask the AGs as well as other stakeholders uh regarding the CDUP question uh to help weigh in, and we can hopefully clear that
078up as we go into the next committee or set of committees. Um I know there's I know there's a lot that needs to be worked out. Um time is short, so folks will really have to come to the table on this if it's going to proceed. But for the moment, uh we'll stop there. I'll note it already does have an effective effective date already in the bill. So, any discussion or comments? Hearing none, um acting vice chair for the vote. Okay. Chair, voting on um Sorry, members are voting on HB 2592 HD2, recommendation of the chair is to pass with amendments. Chair Lee. Aye. Senator Inouye is excused. Senator Chang is also excused. Senator Dela Cruz is aye. Senator DeCourcy. >> No. Chair, your recommendation is adopted. Thank you. Okay, same recommendation for the Committee
079on Education to amend to SD1. Uh any discussion? Yeah, chair votes aye. Members, HB 2592, chair's recommendation passes with amendments. Chair votes aye. Senators Kidani and Fukunaga are excused. I vote aye. Senator DeCourcy. No. No. Chair recommendation is adopted. Thank you. Thank you. Moving on to HB 2437 relating to arts education. Um condition is passed with amendments, just uh changing the effective date to January 1, 3000. There's no discussion. Uh vice chair for the vote. Okay. Members are voting on HB 2437 HD1, noting the excused absences of Senator Inouye and um Senator Chang. Anyone present wanting to vote with reservations or no? Hearing none, chair, your recommendation is adopted. Okay, then for the Committee on Education, same recommendation, pass with amendments. Chair votes aye. Chair votes aye, noting the excused absences of Senators Kidani and
080Fukunaga. Any members voting with reservations or noes? With all ayes voting, I recommendation is adopted. >> Thank you. We are adjourned. You are adjourned.