001Good afternoon and welcome uh to the Senate Committee on Education. Today is Wednesday, March 18th. are meeting in this room tonight and we're being streamed live on YouTube and we must end this hearing in the technical issues committee will reconvene on Friday March 20th at 1 p.m. in the same room to tonight and notice will be posted for the legislator's website. Due to the number of measures before the committee and our time limit testifiers testimony, we're limited to one minute for testifier. And with that, we will begin with our first measure on the agenda. And I just like to say that this is all house bills that have transferred over. The Senate has had those that were similar or might have been a companion. And if we have, if you're able to, you can tell
002us what the difference might be. That would also move forward. So, House Bill 2172, House draft 2, relating to employment of retirees, establishes a five-year pilot program to authorize Department of Education to rehire uh retired teachers and educational officers for hard to staff positions. first to testify the department of education. I know this is not here so aloha chair Kim, vice chair Kanani, members of the committee, Sean Bacon speaking on behalf of the department of education. We stand on our testimony offering comments on this measure and are available to answer any questions. Thank you. Uh while a lot of a lot of chairs appreciate your standing on comments because I think the public has a right to really know what's in these bills and what your position is. I would appreciate if you did summary.
003>> Sorry about that. chair. Um the intent of this bill is really to look at trying to help with some of our um retirees coming back into service um and helping in some of our hard to staff and shortage areas. Um we really support the intent of of this measure. Uh I know that there will be some administrative processes that the department needs to follow on an annual basis. Uh we also have been working closely with the attorney general's office to look how it may affect our our pension and ERS system. So, thank you. >> Thank you. And with that, we do have the attorney general, >> Jenny Nakamoto. And I know you have a lot of um amendments. >> Yes. Good afternoon, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Jenny Nakamoto, deputy attorney general.
004Uh we did submit comments that incorporation of more objective standards and measurable criteria um directly into the statute. We also provided some suggested language and as Mr. Bacon mentioned, we are working with DOE on trying to bridge these. I'm also available for any questions if you may have. Thank you. >> Thank you. Calbert Young for the employees retirement system. >> Good afternoon, madam chair, madam vice chair, members. Um so you have the uh retirement systems testimony and it is different than um the system has testified previously on the uh Senate bill. The testimony is characterized as opposed um to this bill. However, that opposition is due to um advice of uh external tax counsel on the bill that was not available um during the first half of the legislative session. Um, however, it there is
005language um for amendments that are being recommended informed by the attorney general's um opinion and review as well that could help if this bill is to progress some recommended revisions um that are also available from the AGS and external tax council for amendments that would help shore up and clarify uh in the in the bill plus the existing statute. Um and they are on the second page uh of of our testimony. Thank you. >> So being real quick being you brought up the Senate measure. So you said the Senate measure is a little more simplified and easier. >> It it was um it our initial um position was to offer comments on it. not to there was no opposition but comments about the the aspects that were in the bill um that the legislature should
006pay attention to to preserve if the if that bill was to progress. Um but it didn't uh ask for or request or provide like specific amendment languages um because the issues that tax council and the AGS have identified um you know to try and be more clear for Hawaii statutes what could be added to add more definitive clarification requirements to help shore up our plan our retirement plan statute. Yeah, >> thank you. Uh, Osatoule for HSTA. >> We'll stand in strong. >> Okay. Anyone else wanting to testify on this measure? If not, members, we are open for questions. Questions? Um, I guess DOE being as this measure um clearly points out hard to fill uh areas or hard hard to staff. How many teacher vacancies are considered hard to staff? >> I don't have that
007exact number on me, but it's something that I could uh get that information and get it back to the committee for you. And then how many could we realistically be filled through this pilot profile? >> I think that's one of the things that we've talked about in the testimony. We don't have any data on how many would be interested in coming back at this point. I know that we do have some of our substitute teachers currently at this time that are retirees. But beyond that, um the department doesn't have any hard data on how many would be possibly interested in coming back at this point. And I noted that also the what's noted is to um how to ensure that rehire hiring retirees does not reduce the efforts to recruit and retrain new teachers. >>
008So I think part of our part part of our testimony on this is you know I think the department's really focusing on really trying the best we can to to hire our local candidates as best as possible. Um but you know we would appreciate any intent from the legislature to help in any way to help with our shortage if this is a measure that is something that you know would be a possibility. I think the department would be open to that. Um but they would be hired at this point right now on a year-to-year basis. I think we'd have to continually recruit for that position on an annual basis to ensure that we can have somebody be there on a on on a consistent basis as we are training our teachers on an annual basis.
009>> And how will DOE um evaluate whether the pilot program improves student outcomes or staff stability? >> I think that's a I think that's a good question. I think we really need to see how many people actually would take part in this program. Um and then from there really determine, you know, what the student outcomes are. Um we probably have to do some type of survey and evaluation on them uh to to see, you know, is this something that we would want to continue in the future or not? >> Do you folks have a list a contact list of retirees, retiring teachers? It would be something that we could look into our system and, you know, be able to see which people have retired. Um, based on their last contact information that they gave us
010at the time of retirement, it is something that maybe we could look at going out and surveying them to see if it may be something that they are interested. Uh, as I mentioned earlier, there are some um of our current substitute teachers that I do know that are retirees that have chosen to come back on a limited term basis. How hard would it be to just email all your retirees to just say we're just doing, you know, a real quick um search as to if in fact we could you could get hired as a retiree. Would you would you be would you be interested? How hard is that? I think it is something that you know it would be depending on the information that they gave us at the time of retirement their you know
011last contact either phone or email or or actual address based on that. It is something that we could probably send out some type of a survey monkey or something to that effect to just get some general basic information. I think that would help us as we look going forward with these measures because while I think it's meritorious there's a lot of work that has to go into it and you have to you know show that you've recruited you have to show that it's hard to fill there's a lot of lot of hurdles and so I think you know um do DOE uh to your credit you folks want to um support a number of these programs but at the same time the amount of work that goes into it I don't know if you folks
012really think it through and feel comfortable in saying well you know wow this is really good um you know this another whether the benefits outweigh everything else that has to go into it time costs and so forth >> understand and we we have stopped using basic ways of of um surveying people like it seems like you always need an app when you need a consultant or something when you don't you know a simple email go out you know it's like the it's like the Star Advertisers poll. How many of you feel this? It's not scientific, but at least you get a sense of the area and whether it's worth a while to even dictate something like this. >> Understand? Thank you. >> There's any other questions. >> Thank you. So, are there any other states
013that are trying to do this that are doing this? >> I believe there are. I I don't have a list of the other states with me at this point. I know that there I believe there have been a few states that have tried it before in the past but I don't know Senator off the top of my head. >> Yeah. So the leading up to that is then if you are aware of that then what are the hurdles they're having to jump through that we need to do before this comes before us because it might be premature unless we know all the the answers. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Another question I had is a pointed out that we need to show that you've made a good what is a good faith effort?
014um towards recruitment um for the position and they said, you know, perhaps you have to advertise it for so long. So, do you have any thoughts as to what would that look like? We recently just had some discussions with the AG's office on that and what it would look like. I know that there are some collective bargaining agreement um terms that we need to follow. Um you know, things need to be posted internally and then possibly posted externally. Um, currently right now, majority of our postings for our educational officers, our classified staff are posted on a 10-day um, posting period at this point. Um, and then some will actually on the classified side move to a more continuous recruitment. On the teacher side of the of the house, um there is currently in the collective
015bargaining agreement on an annual basis, we need to allow our tenure teachers an opportunity to apply through our teacher assignment and transfer period at the end of that. If there are no applicants, then we would move to an external recruitment. And those are posted um continuously until they are filled. So we'd probably have to look at some type of criteria of how long is long enough for it to be posted before we would consider that that threshold. >> Exactly. And that's some of the hurdles that I spoke about already. folks have a 10 day to post and people I know in the system was saying that's not long enough especially when you do it on January 1 and the first is a holiday and then you count the weekends and if you have 10 days
016and it's not working days it's calendar days right so then you're left with just a short window already um that's embedded into your folks's like principal um recruitment and so forth. So in this situation then do you would you also consider like career fairs and stuff like that as being part of your efforts to recruit? Um >> so currently yes been actively involved in many career fairs both here locally and international. >> Those are the kinds of things we need to hear from. >> Okay. >> Thank you. HSDA, can you come? >> You supposed to have a list of all your teach retired teachers, do you? >> Not an entire list. We have an association of retirees that um they're welcome to join and we could potentially communicate with them about this effort, but we
017don't have an entire list of um retire some listing. >> Yeah. Which they're welcome to join HSt and we do have a list on that area. >> Yeah. Perhaps if you can do something like that in the near future just we get a sense of >> you know people say no way I'm done. >> Yeah. >> Um but if they you know portion then we might say yeah that would make sense. >> We can do that. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay members no other questions we will move on to our next house bill 17 85. This is student relating to student transportation authorizes the DOE to hire a new contractor if a contractor under a student transportation contract fails to provide service on a contracted route for five or more consecutive instructional days
018and authorizes the use of school bus fair revolving fund to offset cost associated procuring replacement services. Starting off with DOE Hello, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kedani, members of the committee. Shantima testify on behalf of the Department of Education. The department stands on his written testimony, which provides comments on this measure. Uh, this bill supports the goal of transportation reliability, but cautioning that the bill's proposed route suspensions and procurement exemptions does not solve the root cause of the statewide driver shortage and may actually reverse progress made in response to the state auditor recommendations. Uh, given the two companion bills, we prefer this version over the other one uh because the required fines were removed from this one. So, we thank you for this opportunity. >> You said the other one, the other >> the companion bill.
019>> Companion bill. The Senate bill. >> Yes. Just kidding. Thank you. >> You stand by for questions. Thank you. >> Okay, we have uh Bonnie Kui for the procurement office. >> Good afternoon, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Bonnie Kahakui, state procurement office. We stand on our written testimony providing comments. Uh we believe the bill is not necessary as there are current statutes and rules that talk about or enforce uh contract remedies for non-performance. In addition, we have concerns regarding the governor the bill authorizing the governor to intervene in some of the uh DOE decisions which is contrary to the chief procurement officer's duties and responsibilities as outlined in uh HRS 103D205. Thank you. I'm available for questions. >> Quick question. Did you testify at the house on this measure? >> Yes, I did.
020>> In the same matter. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, we have two others, Ted Mi and Peeka, uh, Kalaka Bardi, and they're not here. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing none, members, we're open to questions. Senator Hashimoto. You like the box? >> Okay, let me see. So, why don't I have the one? This is DOE. So, right now, what happens when the service is disrupted and there's a day, two days, three days go by and >> Yeah, we're we're not happy about that either. You see the routs are just canceled for those needs. >> And then what happens to the students? They just got to find their own transportation. >> Yes. >> Are you are you given notice usually that it's going to be a disruption? >> Depends
021when we're notified. So if we're notified the day before, the notice will go out the day before, but sometimes we're notified that morning and so we send it out as soon as we can. for the notice. What we're trying to work on is uh an an app um that we can provide um basically would allow parents and students to opt into the app to get notifications directly from the bus company. It's not going to solve the the route cancellation, but at least it'll give them notice as as soon as possible. Um and we can't have that run uh through us because of the privacy issue. You can't give student information to the bus companies, but if parents opt into that, then they can sign up for certain routes to get notifications if the bus route
022is canceled. So again, it doesn't solve the cancellation, but just notifies them as soon as we can. >> What does that app cost? >> Oh, we're just we're looking into it right now. Yeah, we don't have any app yet. >> Okay. I guess cost effectiveness again because it seems like everything is is an app and not everybody has computers and still what's going to happen to those um people that don't right don't not just they don't actually hop in but they don't have the computers as well. So that's a number of people >> correct. So currently the the practice is um so the app would expedite the notification because currently we notify the school and the school blast it to um their students. So there's a delay in that because they have to contact us
023to contact the school to send it out. So they would get notified that way. But the app would allow them to get it straight from the bus company. >> But that's more efficient when you when you go to it cuz you you know you let everybody know when the app is only those who opt in which you may not know and then those who don't have computers. And so now you got to figure out who didn't get the message and now you got to send it all out anyway. >> So we do both. We would do both. >> Yeah. But again, what kind of cost are we talking about? >> Yeah. Do we have to measure out the cost to see if it's worth it to do the app? >> Cuz you know, DOE constantly
024always run to an app and then like an app to see what lunches the student wants and app and then it's it's not like you know small money. You're talking 50 60 $70,000. Yes. >> Right. >> Get another bus probably for that amount of money. Um so if if this bill was to pass and if in fact after 5 days then you know what would happen try to find somebody but you cannot find somebody anyway right >> I think that's that's the big challenge with this um you know we're not opposed to having this authority to do this but basically we'd be having the same bus companies fighting over the same limited pool of of shortage of drivers. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Um, what is the root cause of the bus shortage? >> Um,
025I don't know, but there's a it's a shortage in in Hawaii of bus drivers and CDL driver. And there's just a a nationwide shortage also. >> Yeah. And then how many bus companies does DOE contract with? >> Two big ones and then about three smaller ones. So there's a smaller one that services part of Kawaii, two small ones that service Machai, and then two big ones that service the rest. >> So my follow-up question, which you might not be able to answer since we don't know what the root cause of the shortage is, is what would DOE's solution be? >> So the this the shortage is the the issue right now. I don't know why people don't want to become CDL drivers, but I think right now we appreciate working with our contractors. they're they're
026working hard to provide incentives. I think that's the that's shown to be the the highest leverage point to increase drivers. So, you know, we had a six-year decline of 230 minus 230 drivers. Uh since the bus companies have implemented financial incentives for the drivers, we've had an upswing in a year of about 69 drivers. So they're giving higher wages, signing bonus, guaranteed hours, paid training, and that's resulted in the increase. So we're hoping that the the upswing continues, but we're continuing to have discussions with our contractors. >> Nobody wants >> Well, yeah. So question is, um, have you guys pulled the bus companies as to why they can't get drivers for school buses? >> I don't know if they have the answer to that either. I I I mean, I'm just speculating right now. I
027think the pay has been the most significant factor that's impacted the increase. >> So, it's pay and not student behavior. >> I think the the pay is the biggest one. So, speaking of student behavior, that does make the job very challenging. Um, you know, as a as a teacher managing a classroom of 30 kids in front of you, a bus driver is managing 80 behind you and driving the bus and you're on video. So, it's a it's a tough job. So, we're actually coming out with uh actually we just sent out a letter to all of our schools just kind of reminding uh schools to remind the community about behavior on the bus and that misbehavior can result in loss of bus privileges and >> but how many times have you guys done it? >>
028So, we our schools are good about following up with misbehavior on the bus. I think part of the the challenge is our our bus companies have a delay in letting us know. So, we want to be able to follow up right away because when we're follow up with students about misbehavior on a bus or at school, when you talk to them 5 days later, they forgot what happened already. So, the more time it is, the better. So, I think that letter is also a message to our bus companies who we're sharing with them also that we want to work with you folks on this just we need to know as soon as possible if something happens so we can address the behavior right away. >> What is the pay for a bus driver starting? I
029believe it's now it's about 35 an hour. >> We can get people to be bus drivers. >> Yeah. And they have signing bonus to >> I'm not offering by the way. Just seems like pretty reasonable offer. >> And right now because of the paid training, you can you can actually sign up just with a driver's license and they provide you the paid training to get your CDL license. But I think part of the issue is maybe for the bus drivers, how many how much input are are they giving DOE what what they need to be able to uh stop a student from getting on the bus when they have been misbehaving and DOE recognizes that and does something about it. >> Yeah, we're gonna we continue to communicate with our buses about that. I think
030with this letter going out, we're going to reach out to the bus companies to get more specific feedback on how we can work together with them on this. >> Why has it taken so long to for you to do this >> to send out the letter? >> Yeah. I >> I think we've been trying to address it incident by incident, but I think we felt that because of the shortage, this may not be the primary factor that why people don't want to be bus drivers, but it is a factor. So, we just wanted to address it. It's been around for a long time and you know I think that you got to get in front of stuff. You cannot just say you know individually and all because of a bus a shortage because etiquette and
031and decorum it should be should be foremost no matter what right that's what we teach the students in the classroom hopefully the same kind of behavior should be on the bus so that's not something that should be tolerated but I'm just saying that when these things are happening it just seems like folks are late to to the game and and you're getting you know as a bandaid instead is being proactive in trying to address this stuff and so only now you're coming out with a letter. I mean that's crazy, right? >> Yeah. In hindsight, we should have sent it out sooner. So I'm glad we finally sent it out. >> Well, years should have gone out. I mean, and then constantly yearly, it should be a reminder. You know, school's starting again. Bus bus drivers,
032we like to remind, you know, these are some of the things we got to make and if there's a problem, this is the number you call. the bus driver should be calling or making a report. I mean that should be yearly and not just once in Cleveland, right? >> Yeah, that's what we plan to do. >> It should push to the point where the the bus company can refuse to transport a student who regularly misbehaves or is, >> you know, not behaving on the bus or, you know, hurting students or even abusing the the driver. No. Do they have the authority? >> Well, that's part of it. >> Yeah, >> but that's why I'm asking you. Do do they have that authority now? >> It's up to us. So, they report it to us and
033we decide. >> And we take it seriously though. >> Well, how seriously do the notice go out to the parent that's saying three strikes, you're out. So we we we thought of our initial draft had the three strikes rule, but we didn't want to put that in because the first strike might be serious enough to remove the privileges. So this way it allows the administrators to use chapter 19 and bus privileges can be part of that also. So we don't want to be bound to where student assaults another student on the bus and that's only strike one. We wanted the flexibility for consequences to be more severe. You can state that in your in your rules. It's saying three strikes you out. However, if it's a severe one at any given time, they can they
034can be, you know, rid of their privileges. So again, you know, you guys are educators. You folks are smart. You're supposed to be able to think these things through. Or if you're not, then put it on chat GPT. They'll they'll spell it out for you. >> Thank you. >> No, it's not funny. I mean, I serious. You said you're serious about it, but it doesn't seem like it because you guys are not proactive. We shouldn't have to make deals like this. I mean, >> I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Yeah. How many um privileges have you guys revoked because of bad behavior? You know, >> we can get back to you on that. >> Okay. Question. So I I think you know the the hopefully we can try and figure out some solution because as I
035told you before what what I'm worried about and I think why the impetus of this bill is not from year to year. Yes, we we do know that, you know, bus service has gotten better, but what's going to happen is when you go and renew these contracts, that's when you're going to have problems again because what the bus companies do is if they lose that contract, they're just going to hold the drivers and then you're going to have an inherent shortage and then we're going to end up what we h what happened a couple years ago, right? And so if you're not proactively trying to figure out what you're going to do upon the renewal, that worries me, right? And so I think what we're asking for is what tools do you need? Obviously, I
036think SPO is essentially saying you don't need anything. But, you know, I think I think the the point here of this bill is what are we proactively trying to figure out so that you are clearly given everything that you need to do what you need to do so we don't end up how we ended up a couple years ago where we had these mass cancellation of bus routes, right? And I think it's just persistently happened. And yes, we can blame the the driver shortage, but I know for a fact because when we had a driver shortage on Maui, I called the other bus company and they had the capacity, right? And so I think we gota we gotta we got to think thoroughly and if if you can do it internally fine but you got
037to show us that you're going to do it internally or else you're just going to keep you know being bills right? So anyway um hopefully you guys can we can come up with something or you can think I've been asking you think about what you need and I haven't heard clearly what you guys need. So um I think we're going to keep going at it though because I think you guys need more like I think we have to keep this as an issue because I think people are saying this is an issue. Um so hopefully we can figure something out before the um as it gets to conference. Thank you chair. >> I do have a question for SP after. >> Okay. But you have the resources. You are able to do these things. It's
038just that you folks don't want to do it or yeah feel that it's not necessary but it is. So okay thank you. >> Thanks for being here. So, so I just want to figure out is there a way that we can kind of tie this this bill clearly, you know, to kind of make a statement that this is important. Can we tie it back to some of your rules in that that so that the DOE can operate to to make sure that it's clearly outlined in this bill that you know they're following some of the SPO rules, but they have a specific potential route carve out. We could we would have to amend uh a different statute uh which is HRS the enforcement statute which is 70 chapter chapter 7 which is enforcement contract enforcement
039so it's like 701 702 >> all the way up to 709 talks about enforcement >> um you know what they would do need to do and one of the important things which I don't know uh based on the DOE's contract if there is a performance bond in there. So they could call upon that. Is there liquidated damages in there that should they not provide the bus route for that day, the the bus company would be liable for so much, you know, so much dollars. So that is typically put in some of the bigger contracts where it's necessary to to move forward or to put a performance bond in there which can be substantial because they have the vendor would have to go and get a bond against that. But at least you have a fall
040back. Should the contract fail or be terminated for whatever reason, they're calling the bond. They're calling the company that's holding that bond to make sure that those routes go. >> So, at least we get something back. >> We get something. Yes. >> Okay. >> So, it's it's possible. I don't know if we could do it this year because, you know, I don't think it's addressed in it's not addressed in the um HRS right now about enforcement except for what is already stated. >> Okay. So, but are all those things that you outlined is already under your statute? >> It's Yes, it is. Yes. >> Okay. So, maybe the remedies it needs to point to your statute then. >> Well, it's not our statute. Procurement code is across the board. Okay. all counties, all state agencies,
041any government entity, it's already in there that all all jurisdictions uh should be following or must be following. >> Okay. All right. Thank you, chair. >> Let me ask this question. So, these are possibilities that put into the contract, right? What is it going to make it where the bus company's going to say, "No, we're not going to do that. We don't want to do a bond." And so, then where where is it? >> It is possible. So depending on what what the bond amount is. So the performance bond can be you know typically it's a 100% of the performance. So it it will be substantial and it'll probably it'll cost more because now they have to work that price into the cost of the bond into the price to the state. So there have
042been situations where uh vendors think the bond is too high or they don't want to participate because because of the bond or they can't get the bond. >> So that puts us that put them in the driver's seat because already there's a shortage of of companies and bus drivers, right? I mean so they say it's not worth our while. Well, it's it's a balance because if if you don't have the bus contract, then you don't have any work either. >> There's only the school number one, >> then they're in demand other places, then they're they're going to go there and >> yes, bond performance bonds. Anytime you put performance bonds in uh insure, higher insurance requirements, there's a cost to the state for that. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? Any other questions, members? Not.
043Okay. Let's go on to We're still on buses. Uh HB1 1780, House draft 1, relating to student transportation, requires DOE uh to establish a student bus fair system that includes fair bus passes for students who meet certain statutory requirements, requires a report to the legislature. Uh again, DOE Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kane, members of the committee. Shantima testify on behalf of the Department of Education. Department stands on our written testimony which provides comments on this measure. Uh the department has concerns about prioritizing bus seating primarily based on income as there are other factors that create a need for school bus such as distance from school and lack of safe walking paths. Uh the department also has concerns about the automatic sharing of free and reduced meal data for bus eligibility due to federal privacy laws.
044So thank you for the opportunity to testify. We stand by for questions. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh an Huchi from the AG's office. >> Good afternoon, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kedani, members and Horici from the Attorney General's office. Um, as noted in our testimony, there are references in the bill um to a quote free bus pass or to quote free bus passes that could be misconstrued as including free municipal bus passes. So um to avoid any potential misinterpretation, we've um suggested some revisions in our testimony. Thank you. I'll be available for questions. >> Thank you. and support. >> Okay, we have uh Patty and I'm not sure how to pronounce his last name, Hot Zis Terrarsus and Lauren Poor. Lauren Lore. >> Aloha chair. >> Aloha. Um my name is Lauren Lur. Um
045I'll be testifying on behalf of Patty Hista Rockus. Um but thank you so much for the opportunity to testify behalf of the Hawaii Public Health Institute and the Healthy Eating Active Living Coalition. Uh we support HB1 1780HD1 with amendments. This bill is an important step towards improving educational access for students and we recommend that the bill be amended to provide free bus passes for all DOE students. Um transportation is critical to attendance and academic success. But the modest even the most modest fees um and the need to reapply for service can be barriers to access for families. Um, expanding free bus access would reduce absenteeism, ease the burden on families, and help decrease traffic congestion and emissions around our schools. We appreciate that the goals of this bill are to streamline eligibility, simplify applications, and
046improve communications with the families. Um, but we do respectfully urge the committee to amend the bill to provide free bus passes for all DOE students. Um, we hope that the universal access would remove stigma, um, prevent gaps, and simplify. Thank you so much for the opportunity. >> Thank you. Okay, let's see. We have two, four, six, seven others that have sent in testimonies in support and one with comments. Um, anybody wishing to testify on this measure? Anyone on Zoom wishing to testify? Please come forward, please identify yourself. >> Aloha, Chair. Um, Vice Chair Kadani, I'm Michelle McCoy with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Okay. Uh, we do uh stand in support of this measure um and are asking that uh we look into expanding it to at least the Alice families as well. The prior
047testifier was saying that across the board um transportation access is very important. Clearly, we're having trouble getting the kids to school. Uh so we would um we we do support uh the access and education starts with transportation and getting there. Mahalo. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else wish to testify? Not members questions. Okay, let me go ahead and start with DOE. How much is a bus or how much does it cost for a student that is not subsidized to >> for school bus? So school bus >> total for the year is about three 300 >> 288 for the year >> 288 for a year which approximately comes up to what per trip and this is this is round trip right >> round trip yeah >> that's how much it costs for the family >> for
048the family. >> Yeah for the cost for the due is I think 1,600 per student. 1,600 per student and of the 1,600 uh the family pays 288 >> correct >> per per year. Yes. And 1,600 is per student per year. >> Correct. >> And is that the family pays 288 even though they have more than one child? Is it just flat 288? >> I believe so. >> Yes. >> Okay. And that breaks down to how much per round trip. >> How many days in the school year? >> 180. >> So why don't you calculate it and then get back to that. How many students are expected to qualify for free buses under this bill? >> So we have about for just for the whole DOE. I'll give I'll give you the >> this bill because
049this is if you get free lunch, you get free bus pass, right? This bill is saying that. So how how many students are we additional students? >> So I'll give you the figures of how many are riding the bus right now. >> Okay. >> So currently we have about 19,000 students riding school bus. Of that 19,000 about 10,600 are free free riders and then 8,300 are paid riders. >> 18 I'm sorry say that again. 8 >> um 8,000 >> oh 8,000 >> 8,300. So total is about 19,000 students who ride school bus. So it's not a lot, >> but we also have the city bus and that one because we're giving free city bus passes to middle school and high school students who reside in the area that's eligible for bus. So that's about 7,000
050secondary students have the city bus pass. >> And the cost is what? Cost of the city bus pass is 300 300 per student. >> And what do you folks pay the 300 which is what's the total amount then? >> Yeah. For the year. >> Well, total amount you're paying per year per year. >> Oh, it's about 2.1 million. There's about 7,000 kids on Aahu and about 100 on Kawaii. It's already free on Maui and Big Island. So 19,000 writing, 10,000 of them are free, 8,300 pays for that and it costs us 16,000 per student plus the 21 1 2.1 million for city bus passes. >> Correct. The cost per student is 1,600. 1,600. >> Yes. What did I say? >> 16,000. >> Oh,,600. I have 1,6 um and if you were to give everybody a
051free pass, what would that cost? >> So the free reduce lunch count, there's about 58,000 kids for free lunch. So that's like right now, not all of them even apply to ride the bus, but as far as how many would be eligible, there's about 58,000 students. >> Okay. Um yeah, I know everybody I shouldn't say everybody we all trying to help our students, our families and everything is well we should give free lunch, we should give free buses, but there's a huge cost to this. So where would the money come from for these measures? I mean, yeah, it will come from the ledge, but where would where would we where would we cut it from? >> I don't know. That would be a lot of a lot of money. So shall we cut it from
052K through 12? I mean should we cut it from the capuna? Shall we cut it from uh shall we cut it from you know where where when people testify in support for free? I always want to ask where do you think we're going to get the money from or do we raise taxes? >> Right. So that's why for DOE we had only comments on this measure and it it wasn't listed. We're not we're not opposed to having free bus for everybody, but it wasn't one of our priorities that we had requested through the legislature. >> Okay. Further questions, members. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Next item is House Bill SE 1872, House draft 1, uh relating to early learning apprenticeship grant program. This establishes an early learning apprenticeship grant program to be administered by the
053University of Hawaii to provide financial support for early learning program service providers in the state to participate and in instate or federally approved early learning apprenticeship programs and requires an annual report. So, we have uh board of education. Good afternoon, senators. You have the testimony in front of you. Conceptually, the board supports any and all efforts to increase the workforce as it regards to early learning. Um, when it comes to the actual implementation of the grant program, of course, we defer to the University of Hawaii. When it comes to the funding, we defer to all of you actually to determine what funding would be adequate. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Nathan Morata for the University of Hawaii. >> Good afternoon, Chair K, Vice Chair Kadan, members of committee. Nathan Morata, Dean, uh Mano, College of
054Education. This bill is very similar to the House Bill version. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony and offering comments on this bill which establishes an early learning apprenticeship grant program. This bill offers tangible solutions by by addressing some pressing issues with regard to number one support and develop career pathways potentially increasing the supply of early childhood learning slots and potentially adding to um strengthening the e economic stability for families. I'll be available for any questions. Thank you. You >> Yukio Cross, we saw you Cole Cross. I don't know why I always want to call you. Apologize. >> Hello, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kedani, and members of the committee. I'm Yuko Aikoracross, director of the Executive Office on Early Learning. We support HB1872HD1 and defer to the University of Hawaii on implementation and funding.
055Registered apprenticeship programs are an effective way to grow our early learning workforce. They offer opportunities for structured hands-on experience, employer paid classroom learning, and comprehensive support to advance their careers. Many people entering the early learning field are non-traditional students who really benefit from the additional wraparound support and mentoring included in this model. This bill helps remove financial barriers to participating in apprenticeship programs that in turn can help us recruit and retain more educators, improve compensation over time, and strengthen career pathways. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> Thank you, Ryan Yammane for human services. here. Edno, let me see. Edno for charter schools out here. Also in support, Ela Yamashita support Anton Tr, the city and county of Honolulu support. Jared Ellis, >> thank you Jared. Uh Sher Manor, the chief of Nadia. Good
056afternoon, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kedani, and members of the committee. The >> Introduce yourself so you don't Thank you. My name is Nadia Hold. I'm testifying on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce Hawaii. The core point we want to relay is that the child care workforce is the workforce behind our workforce. So when there's a child care breakdown or when the child care system is unstable, every sector of our economy is impacted and employers are feeling this directly in their recruitment and retention numbers. The child the chamber recently conducted a childcare economic impact report and it found that employers are impacted $787 million through annual loss annually. And this is a specific study to our state and this is also due to specifically childc care related turnover and absenteeism. And in turn the state is
057losing out on $396 million in lost tax revenue annually. And the root issue is that the early child care workforce lacks a sustainable entry and retention pipeline. The regional experts will tell you that wages for preschool and childcare providers are $13 to $17 an hour in the state. And so this bill provides incentives to obtain the experience and the credentials and opens the door to not just get into the field, but to advance in the field. And this bill could strengthen workforce participation across Hawaii's economy. Not to mention that the um most recent science indicates that over 90% of brain development occurs before the age of five. So there are profound positive implications for our future workforce pipeline as well. This is both an economic and a workforce development priority. And we really thank you
058for hearing this measure. Available for any questions. Mahalo. Thank you. See Mia Suchia. from Children Action Network. Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kan, respected committee members. My name is Malia Suchia on behalf of Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks. You have my written testimony and support. I would like to add a few more comments. Um, previous to this role, I was a preschool teacher for almost 20 years. I have five kids. Going through that whole process was very challenging. going through the pathway of trying to become a teacher was very segmented. And in early childhood in particular, it's not something you can learn in a book. It's not something that you can learn on on any kind of shortterm manner either. And so to be able to have this program, to be able to be in the
059classroom learning on the on the job, learning with a mentor, with a coach, being able to get that feedback and not being have to not being torn away from your family or from your work to be able to pursue you know, higher degree or pursue your education to be able to advance would be so tremendous. This would have changed my life so much. Just to not have to incur the cost and to be able to be in the classroom learning from somebody who would have been experienced would have been such a tremendous help. So, we fully support this bill. Um, we ask that you please pass it. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Terry Lock. >> Thank you, Terry. Uh, let's see. Jared Ellis. I have one, two, three, four, five. I think I have
060He's here. No, not here. Oh my goodness. We have uh or 46 other people um that sent in testimony in support. I'm not going to read all the names. Anyone else here wishing to testify on this measure? Come. >> Aloha, Chair Kim. >> Aloha, >> Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kadani, and members of the committee. I'm Michelle McCoy with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and we staying stand in uh strong support of this measure. Um early learning drives lifelong outcomes as the prior testifier had mentioned, you know, the brain development happens before the age of five. So, that aspect of early learning is very important. But for workforce development, it's very important that these vital workers are supported in our community and in our state. And um we have submitted uh written testimony as well. >>
061So we stand in support. Mahalo. >> Thank you, Michelle. >> Okay. Anyone else? Hearing none. We are open for questions. Members, go ahead and start. >> Yes. Thank you, Dean. Are you aware Morata? Are you aware of um what for federal programs are out there for these kinds of apprenticeship programs? >> Uh well, we know a couple states that do have these kinds of early childhood apprentichip programs. Arizona, I think, and Illinois. However, we weren't able to access any of their data yet. We're hoping to get that. Uh I know that we've had uh some federal a federal grant uh projects. Um I know Terry was a PI, a principal investigator of one that just recently ended that looked at help to develop workforce. So there are a few that are out there. Um clearly
062with the federal landscape, it's becoming much more challenging, but it's there there's there's some out there. Yes. >> Okay. Because it specifically refers to um federal pro federal workforce. Um >> so because it basically modeled after the uh the federal uh apprenticeship program approved early learning apprenticeship program. >> Yes. >> But um >> and that grant went to the university or >> um the the previous one? Yes, it came to the university. Yes. >> And you folks administered? Yes, we did. And it was to providers. >> Uh no, this was to uh for uh I believe that that grant was a little bit different. uh that one was more for like direct to student support for tuition and in order for them to to stay in school. >> Okay. So on that vein, what is
063the cost for a early learning early learning apprentice or student? What's the pathway? Is it the same as a teacher? >> It's uh it's very similar. uh but in this case you know the the candidate or the the the student will then you know will be compensated early on in their career they working with a mentor teacher. So both the candidate and the mentor teacher will be u compensated and after every year based on the apprenticeship model they they have to have an increase for the next two or three years and and that funds can be used of course for salaries compensation andor tuition things of that nature. >> So that was a grant. How much was that grant? Sorry, >> she was a principal investigator of the grant. Okay. >> Okay. What was the
064question? How much was that grant? >> Uh the grant from the earlier grant we had was preschool open doors grant and that was a federal grant to really provide stipens to >> That's what he said. >> Um stipen amount maybe >> the total of the grant. >> Okay. So that was for a state We went through um P20 and so I'm thinking I'm not sure exactly what the total was. Um Yuko Ara Kawak Cross was also part of that um leadership team. >> Okay. So it's it's through connected to them taking the class at the university or any place or >> Yeah. So the apprenticeship program um actually has started at the entry level. We currently have students at Honolulu Community College. So there we have um I would say about 8 to 10 apprentices
065right now. Several are on the on Hawaii Island, but um about five are here on Aahu. >> Okay. And they're under the same that federal grant where that grant's gone. >> So that grant is gone. Um >> so what pays them now? Yeah. So, so the registered apprenticeship program, we have one uh registered apprenticeship program that's been federally and state u approved of that's through Kiki Oka and so they have written a variety of different grants in order to support their apprentices. Some of the funds that went to the apprentices on Hawaii Island actually came from some ARPA funds that went through the county of uh Hawaii Island, Hawaii Hawaii County. And so sub so it was a mixture of funds from >> so how many under the P20 um grant how many apprentices did
066we actually get and how many of them actually became hired or >> okay so all the apprentices um are hired they're learning on the job and they're starting off um primarily as aids in the program they're getting um basically around $17 to $19 an hour. Um so that's part of the apprenticeship program. So once they complete their first milestone um they will have a a increase in pay and so their first milestone is uh a child development associate. It's a national credential. The second milestone is a certificate in early childhood education. And so that bumps up their pay another 10% or so. >> Okay. So, how many actual uh apprentices did we get with that federal grant? >> With that f federal grant, I mean, currently in our state, we've supported the the stipens uh
067for the federal these these apprentices. Um, so I would say we probably have a handful like about 10 10 apprentices right now. >> No, that's not the question. The question is how many apprentices did we get from that federal grant? Oh, from that federal grant. I think that so I would say that that particular federal grant maybe supported maybe about 10 to 10 about five to six apprentices because >> five to six apprentices. And how much was that grant for practice? >> Well, the the grant was for many things. Um the apprentice part of it was just a small portion of that grant. >> What amount is that? I'm trying to get the data to determine >> how much we're asking for. How many apprentices are we gonna have? Is it gonna is it going
068to make a dent into what we need? >> Um, and we don't seem to have the data or you folks aren't able to provide me with the data at this point. So, I mean, h what are we talking about in this bill? How many how much money? What's the how many apprentices? Yeah, I think um when we calculated if given say $6 million, we would support perhaps about 25 apprentices, 25 mentor teachers, and then we would probably support about 200 um uh early childhood folks that are already working because there there is a wage differential in the grant as well to rate retain the staff. that are already working in these early learning um programs. >> So I think a lot of the funding will be provided to individuals already working in in in the
069at the schools and not so much a uh and some with recruitment as far as bringing new candidates in. Uh so it's kind of a mixture of individuals. >> Okay. >> So how much are we asking how much does this bill call for? I believe we're asking for six million. >> Six million. So $6 million. So these are students first of all who become apprentices that go through the course and at some point they become an appren apprentice or do they start off as an apprentice right off the bat? >> They start off as an apprentice right off the bat. >> Right off the bat. So they start as an apprentice working with a mentor teacher and then because we're increasing their pay, we also want to give incentives to the rest of the staff
070so they stay with the program. So this is a combination of um supporting uh the wages. >> Okay. So it's not like a teacher where you go through training and then you become you do student teaching and you get paid for student teaching. No, this this apprentichip program actually starts compensation as soon as they enter. >> When while and while they're doing this, are they taking classes at the university? >> Are they taking class at the university or on CC or other institutions? Yes. >> Can they do it at a private institution as well? >> Well, this one really works with the early childhood education programs that we already have in our university, both at the community college as well as um the four-year university. And so then these 25 say 25 apprentices start off
071and right off the bat you're paid then 17 to $19 an hour and their mentored teachers then get paid what >> they're getting a stipen for being a mentor teacher to support the to support the apprentice. So they're already getting paid but they're getting an additional >> stipen are we talking about? Uh, we were, let's see, I think we were giving probably um like a $5,000 stipen >> per year per month. >> Per per year. >> And then does the does the entity that they're doing the apprentice program, the service provider gets something as well? >> Well, the funds actually go to the employer itself, the the school or the center. Um and those funds are then are earmarked from the university to the actual employer and then the employer then disseminates to current teachers,
072mentors and all. And >> who monitors this? Who >> uh we would at the university? >> So folks audit? >> Yes. >> At the end of the program or during >> I think annually throughout Yes. >> throughout. Any other questions members on this? Um and then so this would be a one time or continue. >> Yeah, we'd like to see it as a continuum. >> Okay, so here's the next question. Where do you think the money should come from? >> Uh well, I know the uh university has a bunch of priorities. uh we we can certainly if if it can't come from the uh at least from this this this uh this avenue then we would certainly look at the university and uh and see what priorities they have >> and how high up priorities
073>> $245 million so close right now >> their funds other questions. Thank you. Next item is Senate Bill. Senate bill House Bill 1889, House draft 1, relating to school psychologists creates a working school psychologist working group within the department of education to recommend actionable steps or proposed legislation for an immediate pathway to lensure for school psychologist that can be acted upon in 2027. and the first testifier from DOE. >> Good afternoon, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kedani, members of the committee. I'm Heidi Armstrong, Department of Education, and the department um supports this bill. This bill was not initiated by the department, but the department recognizes that Hawaii is the only state that does not currently have a lensure pathway for school psychologists. And by participating in this workg group, the outcome um would hopefully be able
074to inform future policy decisions without presupposing a specific regulatory outcome. >> Can you explain that? What did you just said? the there are um different viewpoints on lensure and we don't want to make any presuppositions as to which viewpoint um is um takes more weight. And so this working group would bring together regulatory agencies and state agencies to discuss um possibilities of um the significance of issuing a license for the school psychologist workg group. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Christopher Fernandez, Board of Psychology, DCCA. Good afternoon, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. My name is Christopher Fernandez, executive officer to the board of psychology. I'm here to stand on the board's testimony supporting the intent. Uh the testimony is the same as the previous committee. Um nothing changed in the bill. Um and
075that uh was something that the board was looking at uh the board makeup. I mean, sorry, not the sorry, I'm talking about the working group makeup. Sorry about that. Um, so the board had requested that if it was the intention of the working group to look at putting school psychology specialists into uh 465 that we would include. We requested that HPA be included since the psychologists have a vested interest in that chapter. Um, that was the only thing that we had asked thus far from this. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Alex. Please come on up. >> I don't know if I said your name correctly. >> That's correct. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon, chair, vice chair, >> members of the committee. I'm Alex Likton. I'm the legislative chair for the Hawaii Psychological Association. I'm
076here to offer comments and and ask for an amendment. Uh HPA does support the licensing or credentiing of school psychologists. uh we are an important stakeholder in the process but are excluded from the proposed working group in HP189. We were included in past versions of the bill which did not pass. Therefore, we're asking for an amendment to include HPA in the working group given the position by the school psychologist uh that they're part of the same profession and they want to be licensed on the board of psychology that me very much affects us is then two members of the school psychologist members they would be added to the board of psychology uh and decide on licensing plates complaints against psychologists. Thank you very much uh for the opportunity to testify. Welcome. Thank you. See, Lesie
077Bonnage. >> Yes. Hi, my name is Bonik. Aloha, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kadani, and members of committee, and thank you for the opportunity to testify. Um, I first joined the HASP working group to establish licensing or credentiing in the state of Hawaii in 2011. I wrote the first draft of this bill in 2014 and have subsequently got it uh introduced in some form or another for every legislative session since. Um originally we were working with Lesie Slavin and Jill Elliot with HPA who were amenable and supportive of of us moving forward. Um and um that that was when they were included in that. Um, since then, um, we've had several adversarial meetings with HPA where they have a lot of incorrect information they like to share and you can verify their testimony for yourselves. I'm
078not going to waste the committee's time on that. As such, we are not amendable to having them or any other private organization and want to stick to government entities and our own group. Um, our national association does represent us. Our state association does represent us. Hawaii psych association has no mechanism to represent school psychologists and have been adversarial towards us. So, if we want to move forward with this in a um a collaborative way, it won't be with HPA based on their current and past behavior. Thank you so much for the time uh to testify and I'm here for any questions. >> Okay. Uh let's see. Hawaii State Council on Mental Health. Anyone hear from them? Uh Alec Morantic. >> Aloha chair, co-chair, members of the committee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify. I
079am a trained school psychologist living and working on Big Island. I support this measure moving forward as is. Um the national association sets the standards on scope of practice for school psychologists. Um so they have a vested interest in being part of this working group. Um, HPA is not a regulatory agency and does not represent me as a school psychologist and the board of psychology does uh have clinical psyches that sit on their board and most of their board is made up of clinical psych. So I feel like the current composition would effectively address the stakeholder concerns as well as effectively provide insights for the working groups um lensure pathway recommendations. Thank you for this opportunity to testify. >> Okay. Thank you, Alexis Jameson. >> Aloha. >> Oh, sorry. I was muted. Thank you so
080much for the opportunity to testify. My name is Alexis Jameson and I'm a school psychologist in Libertahu and I'm the current past president-elect. I do want to voice my support for the bill as is as I don't think HPA should represent us in this working group as they don't represent school psychologists or include school psychologists. So it doesn't make sense for them to be a part of that working group for lensure. Um and just moving you know just to emphasize the importance of this bill. I'm a homegrown school psychologist and that means that I had to go to a different you know a different state to be um to become a school psychologist and get educated and I'm licensed in Kansas which is where my degrees are from but I can't be here in Hawaii
081because we don't have lensure. So I really feel it's critical for us to move forward with this working group so that Hawaii can finally have lensure for school psychologists in our state. >> Thank you so much. Let's see. That's all that we have that signed up as testify in person or on Zoom. There's three four others. Um, anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Come forward. None. Okay. Questions? Members questions? >> Okay. uh court >> HPA. >> So I have a a question. Um in your testimony, it shares that the board also suggests adding local stakeholders, excuse me, such as universities and supports keeping the working group exempt from open meetings law. Why would you need to be exempt from open meetings? >> I don't believe that's in our testimony. >> Correct. Well, >>
082she said she doesn't believe it's there. >> Is that board of psych? I apologize. >> Thank you so much. >> Yeah. Which is which? >> Thank you. Please exc Oh, please if you could respond >> um to your testimony. Board of Psychology. Yes. >> Yes. Thank you so much. So, uh why would that be necessary to exempt from open meetings law? um just in the past that we had um had concerns that there would be additional administrative requirements that would need to be done like filing meetings um and certain things that would come out of like DCCA PPVL's um staffing. So we were just asking that maybe that be um omitted so that there isn't that additional um additional requirement. Sorry. Okay. Um, okay. And then I Thank you very much. I do have a
083question for HPA as well. So, unless the board wants to and the committee wants you to stay for other questions. Uh, chair, when the time permits, I'd like to uh ask HPA to come up. >> Yeah. I I have a question. So, you're on the board of psychology. >> I I am the executive officer. Yes. >> And this is under DCCA, >> Correct. So, as far as lensure, um what cuz according to testimony today, they've been introducing this measure year after year. So, what what seems to be the problem? >> Um I think the board's view has been that there are there are two parties obviously. One of them is within the chapter already is psychologists, licensed psychologists and I'm using terms that are um defined in the chapter 465. So we're talking about licensed
084psychologists who have obtained lensure in the state. So it's no distinction about what psychology is outside of what it's defined as in 465. So uh those folks having vested interest um have representation through HPA. uh they can regularly attend meetings uh they can affect the chapter um so I think that um the the other party I was a school psychologist you know they um from the board's preview uh are comprised of basically about two uh two parties two groups uh there's the school psychology specialist as that has been defined in uh bills in the past um this is a specialist in education I believe degree uh level whereas there is the uh school psychologists who are um doctorally um educated um who in fact actually can be licensed through through the chapter 465 at this
085time um there's obviously discrepancies with their training and their uh level of uh say training hours is one of the big things is not as high as what we require in 465. So, a lot of school psychologists that are doctoral um can't meet our requirements at this time unless they do additional or understand our licensing processes here in Hawaii. >> So, who who trains and credentials school psychologist? >> Um I do not believe that there are any um education programs in the universities located in Hawaii at this time. Okay. So, we don't have school psychologist programs that that's on the on the mainland. >> Okay. >> And the reason in uh left room, anybody else here from uh um feel that there's um there's no need for a um school psychologist because you're a psychologist.
086You're a psychologist that can go to the schools and work at the schools. Is that >> I'm not sure about that question. I think Okay. So you have school psychologist and then you have psy licensed psychologist. So a licensed psychologist can can go be in schools. I I don't know of any uh restrictions of psychologists in practice in Hawaii if they're question is how do they select their their psychologist based on what and how do they determine you're qualified to be a school psychologist versus a licensed psychologist. I think outside of the bills that have been introduced, um, you know, I think the DOE has had the, um, the responsibility of vetting the school psychologists. >> Okay. Any other questions? >> Um, let me just ask um, my psychologist that's on Zoom, are you from
087the University of Hawaii? No, I'm the legislative chair for the Hawaii Association of School Psychologists and have served every position on the board. Um the program of for school psychologists is actually at Shamanod University and they're on their second cohort. And this is again why when we have people who don't know school psychologists, don't know what's happening with school psychology in the state that are making decisions about school psychologists, which has happened since 1999 with our inception of the Felix consent decree, why it's not actually helpful to us. They don't know. And that keeps happening in every meeting that we were having with DCCA and HPA. They don't know. And then they would try to kind of put us in one of their boxes. So the the the way that it works now is one
088of us applies, it goes through the uh office of talent management, which is Sean Bacon's department. Uh somebody has to look at that paperwork and say, is this person qualified or not? that actually takes so much time versus a speech pathologist applies, they are licensed through DCCA, they get put on the list to be eligible for hiring. Um, so it actually has inhibited our ability to hire a school psychologist in a timely fashion. And I've seen numbers of people over my 15 years of involvement with our state association that will email and say, "I applied. I didn't hear back for 6 months and I had to take a job in another state because I couldn't afford to wait that long." So we have lost positions by not having credentiing over the years. >> Thank you.
089De >> I'm sorry. >> Question. >> Did you want to ask a question? >> Um so how did we how did the schools go about hiring school psychologist? the the requirements to be there's several options. A master's degree in school psychology, 1,200 hours of internship, 600 hours must have been in an elementary, middle, or secondary school setting. Provided that when the internship is less than 1,200 hours or 600 hours in a school setting, one additional year of supervised professional work as a school psychologist in a school setting will meet the requirement. The section, the second option is a master's degree from a regionally accredited college or university in educational psychology, counseling psychology, or a closely related field in a psychology profession that includes graduate coursework in human learning and development. Also with the 1,200hour internship
090of which 600 hours is done in a school setting. The third option um as previously mentioned being a current school psych having a current school psychologist license and the fourth would be currently nationally certified school psychologist certification from NASP or the national association for school psychologist. >> So if you have a degree from another college on the mainland and you're not licensed here they can still get >> correct. Correct. >> So have you had problems finding a school psychologist? >> We do. We currently have 70 positions um 26 vacancies. We are current which is a current vacancy rate of 27%. Um in 2024 our vacancy rate was 43%. So we have improved that and as previously mentioned it was the department that um received a grant that enabled us to partner with Shamanad University to
091get that school psychologist program established. >> So would get having a a so-called licensed school psychologist changed any any of your um ability to to get people school psychologists or to hire or No. Um and that is where um we want to get rid of all presuppositions. That's where the the debate is. Is a license a bureaucratic function or is the license um an extra layer of protection in um valuing the credentials of the profession. Is it an extra there to prevent I mean safety or >> um and and that would be the discussion of the work group um to um come to a consensus. There are many differing viewpoints on that. Um one um >> how do you to come to consensus? I don't see any kind of consensus to even get a board
092together. So um The other question is um will lensure requirements um help address the shortages or does it add additional barriers? I mean every time you have license it's a >> and no matter what profession is a group that want to keep keep people out and you have to jump through hoops to come in and it makes it harder and we keep trying to get more lensures but yet again you know it's this this group that want to protect their group. So is it >> uh I I I don't have a definitive answer. I I think there are varying opinions on that. Um the the bottom line is you can be a school psychologist in Hawaii without having a license whereas in the other 49 states you cannot be a school psychologist if you don't
093have a license. >> Okay. >> Do you know why it's taken so long to get a working group established? >> No. Okay. Sure. Yeah. Um so, uh do you think that this working group would help to fill the shortage? >> Um I I think I don't think it would help, but I don't think it would hinder. Um part of this shortage is um the availability of programs um to become a school psychologist. Um I I at this time without having the discussions of a working group I don't think it I'm I'm neutral. I don't think it could help or hinder. >> Yeah. Because this uh working group says it is intended to study the issue. >> Mhm. >> Uh we already know there's an issue. So we don't need to create a working group to
094tell us there's an issue. What we don't have is we don't have the concrete pathways on what's going to fill those vacancies. So again, like we're kicking the can down the road, right? Is it is is we have psychologist shortages in the schools because we don't have those discussions or are we not getting to the root of the problem? So I mean creating working groups to keep talking about it, talk like we already know there's an issue. I don't need data to prove it. We have shortages, right? That that proves >> there is an issue. Correct. So okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, chair. Okay, >> I have a question. I guess back to DCCA. What's the cost for someone say we decide they're going to be licensed licensed? So, what kind
095of hoops and what kind of cost is involved? >> Okay. Um, do you mind if I use the current for psychologist process? Um so a psychologist uh who wish to obtain lensure in the state um can do so through uh multiple pathways. Um three of them involve certification at the national level. Uh the board uh processing of those applications is nominal because the certification is nationally recognized by the federal government. >> What does it cost the person? So the person would be uh so it's a $50 application fee. Um and then the uh license fees I believe are u depend on when they get licensed within the 2-year bienium. Um on the first leg I believe it's around uh $280. Um on the second half I believe that's about half. Um there are additional fees
096including the um the um compliance resolution fund which funds the RICO um function of the licensing. So um >> which is about how much? >> I believe that is u somewhere in the range of $100. >> Okay. So that's one way. What's the other? >> And so those are the certification. Um it's the same fees for whether you're going to apply by examination. Um so that would be to sit for the examination the EP. Um we they you can also apply this is for those who are already licensed in other states. Um you can be licensed through examination waiver. So you would supply the board with a examination that meets the requirements at the time you sat for that exam. Um after we've received all these documents, we also verify internship and posttock verification which
097requires notoriization from their supervisors. So uh typical process may take an applicant maybe uh one to one to six months to accomplish. Um we don't have any data on that. I'm just guessing on you know my experience. Um, >> how many people go through license cheer for? >> Oh, I wish I would have brought that information. >> Um, typically on an on an agenda we have uh >> anywhere from three to six um applicants. >> Applicants. Yeah. >> How many get rejected or will pass? >> Um, very little. Um we usually maybe have one to two every two years denials. >> So right now a school psychologist can go through DOE apply to become a school psychologist. If they meet all your requirements then they get hired. You don't have any license fees. You don't
098have any exams. You don't have any of that. But if the the and so any of your current would it be then you would not be able to hire people without license if the we have a lensure requirement they would have to be licensed before DOE can hire them. >> I think on the um on the structures of the previous bills it would be that way that you would be licensed that would be the pri the first access point. >> Okay. So now there would be a delay in them getting getting psychologist because you have to wait for them to go through all of these hoops and then and then some. >> Yes. >> Should I just stay? >> Yeah. >> There's also not a clear pathway on how to get the license and who
099would issue the license. >> Okay. But we do have Shamanad now have a cohort and they will consistently offer the courses so that you have people that are coming up that can be placed, >> right? Yes. >> And they help you place they help place these. >> Yes. >> Is there a reason why uh doesn't have a pathway? >> I can't speak for uh >> Okay. Well, that's the whole thing is to get DOE and uh to start talking to each other. So, can you guys reach out to >> We we we do speak with them. Yes. >> Well, could you then? >> Yes, we'll continue to. Sure. >> Okay. Thank you. Questions? Any more questions? Okay. Well, thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. We are on House Bill 1893. Uh HD2 clarifies that public
100charter school teachers are eligible for incentives under the teacher national board certification incentive program. Increases the bonuses per year for each public school teacher. And public charter school teacher maintains national board certification. Uh And our testifier is DOE. >> Good afternoon, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kedani, members of the committee. Sean Bacon speaking on behalf of the department. We stand on our written testimony and support. And really, this bill helps to clarify that any public um school teacher, including public charter schools, are eligible for the national board incentive. Uh the department stands ready for any questions. Thank you. >> Okay, we have Ann Hoyuchi for the AG's office. >> Good afternoon, Chair Kim, Vice Chair Gidani, members and Horuchi from the A's office. Um the incentive program is set forth in HRS 302A-706. Um and the
101bill amends that statute to um expressly provide that charter school teachers are eligible for the incentive program. But as we noted in our testimony, the DOE is not the employer of charter school teachers. Um the charter school teachers are employed by their respective charter schools. And so in our testimony, we've provided some revisions that we think will um um be will um allow us to uh to um effectuate the bill's apparent intent um and avoid any kind of implementation ambiguity. Um I'll be available for questions. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. See, we have Mitsya I'm speaking on behalf of the board of Hawaii Teacher Standards Board. Um we stand on our testimony and strong support because we do find that charter schools teachers especially we want to incentivize them to become national board certified teachers
102because we only have six currently at our charter schools and we have about 300 at our DOE schools. So we want to incentivize this. So clarifying the language would help. Um and then we just support all our national board certified teachers as we think it's a great incentive to make to help teachers stay retain them and keep them in the system. Thank you. >> Thank you. Aloha chair, vice chair, Sarah Millen on behalf of HSTA. Um to echo what they've shared, absolutely nationally board-certified teachers are the best of our profession. You know, we're talking if you want to go to a doctor, you want a board certified doctor in a lot of areas. And so we want to encourage and grow this program. It's also important to have that equity because charter schools often those
103teachers tell us that they don't always get the same things. So we want to make sure that we have these programs in place to encourage the next generation of teachers to seek this out. So we ask for your support. Mahalo. >> Well, quick question. So I have to call you back. So, charter schools can belong to HSTA. >> Yes. Okay. And you have a lot of the teachers there. >> Thank you. >> Edno from Charter Schools Commission. >> Edno, not here. Okay. Office of Hawaiian Affairs. She's not here. Okay. And then we have Oh, I don't know 20 more in support. Anyone else who are wishing to testify on this measure want to come forward? If not, okay, questions, members, I have questions. Um, I guess DOE. >> Well, charter schools. Anybody from charter school?
104Nobody here is from charter schools. Okay. So, DOE in light of No. So currently is the charter school teachers they if they're certified they get the they get the 5,000 bonus, right? >> I think that's the the thing in question at this point. Um >> no, this will make it this will put it in law, but I think they get it. Don't they get it? Let's see. Yes, they do. >> I'm sorry. >> Board chair, did you say yes, they get it? >> Okay. So, so it's not like they're not getting, but what this this bill will do, it'll make it clear that they are also eligible to get it, although they're getting it now. We gave it to DE teachers 22 years ago because um it was clear that out of all the certifications
105that educator can get you know out of all the uh credentials that a educator can get the national board certification is by far the the most effective more than a master's degrees for example. Um, yeah, there's some studies that show if a child has a national board certified teacher for three years, consecutive years, they will actually gain a year in educational progress. So, it's a very lowc cost investment um to make. >> So, I guess when I went to school, I lost a a loss. >> I went to school I went to school before you. So, >> we're in the minus. We're not in the plus. Um, okay. I think that's all the questions. Anybody else have questions? If not, okay. >> Okay. Moving right along. House Bill 2344 HG1. Minister establishes a temporary independent
106public school realignment and closure commission to develop and recommend a comprehensive package of school consolidations, realignments and closures based on the federalbased realignment and closure model. Requires an expedited approval process by the governor and legislature. We have DOE. Sean, is that you again? Nope, it's not. God, I thought I was going to hit it. I got two Shawn. I figured sorry to ruin the Shan >> The Shan show. Um chair, vice chair, members of the committee, Elizabeth Tigashi. On behalf of the Department of Education, um we just wanted to provide our comments and state that we are currently in the process of following our admin rules in regards to the consolidation of schools looking at potentially using fall 2026 enrollment data in order to inform what potential schools could be studied um and be recommended
107for potential closure in the upcoming year. Um one of the things that if this bill were to proceed, we do have some recommendations that we would like to make. One of them being that on the commission, we do feel it's important that somebody from the Department of Education be part of the commission in order to ensure that education and student outcomes remain a priority in those decisions. In addition to re-evaluating the timeline, I think one of the things that we were concerned about is that depending on recommendations that come from the commission, it could evolve different timelines in order to ensure smooth transitions not only of students of vulnerable populations, but also ensuring that we address and take care of our personnel as well. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Uh let's see. Hawaii State Board
108of Education Once again, good afternoon, senators. the board's testimony is that we believe that this is an issue that deserves continued discussion, but I would urge the committee if you're going to send this bill out to take a deep dive in terms of what's in the bill and what the basis realignment and closures commission did back in the late8s was apparently the motivation for this bill is the B and if you you know this by the way that um when the B got stood up in the mid 80s the first one met in 1988 8. They met five times from 1988 to 2005 in that 17-year period. And during that time, they collectively closed 154 bases and realigned 207 bases. So, it was a very effective commission because, as you know, the rationale um of
109the commission was it would come up with a list of bases and Congress had to vote up or down. They couldn't cherrypick bases off of that list. And so it was so effective that the B has not met since 2005. Um so for the past 21 years the B has never reconvened because it's gone back to the old way. The old way is it was done by politics. And so the makeup of this committee, I would again urge your committee to take a look at the makeup, right? Um the B was a nine member commission back in the day appointed nominated by the president and confirmed by the US Senate and all the B the five B commissions that were stood up had at least four or five retired generals that their respons command responsibility
110was overseeing facilities when they were in service. This approach conceivably could have eight of the nine members with no educational experience. And I think we all know the whole purpose of this exercise is to see what's in the best interest of students. That a in conceptually and in theory a small school of 80 students may not have the capacity to deliver the kind of the breadth and depth of courses that we believe children should have. So, you know, it's it's it's not necessarily a business decision, but uh primarily it's a educational decision. So, you might want to take a look at the current language and decide whether or not this is something you want to amend the bill to reflect that um the purpose is for um better educational outcomes. >> Thank you, Keith Reagan.
111Good afternoon, Gordon Wood or Mr. Rian. Uh you have the department's written testimony offering comments in two areas. Um the the bill would place this commission within DAGs. And we note that our statutory um responsibilities focus on administrative and infrastructure support and don't encompass the educational considerations that are essential to the operations of this commission. And secondly, uh we are concerned that the current state of the bill doesn't provide uh a funding amount and without funding and other support, uh if DAGs were to be involved, we would have to divert monies and resources from our statutory responsibilities. I'm available for any questions. >> Okay, thank you. Uh Joy Bolasan in opposition. Leland Brady comments for Aloha Independent Living and Susan Pakola Davis individual in opposition. Anybody else here wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing
112none, we are in questions. Senator Dor, thanks. Uh where are you folks at with your uh school consolidation plan? I believe that that was supposed to be ready for um I guess distributed this year. >> So we did senator we did do an update to the board of education because one of the things that we did in the past year was we did stakeholder engaging with all of our principles and especially um looking at what other school districts nationally are doing and how they're handling their consolidation processes. In addition with we did meet with leaders and principles of previous schools that were consolidated. And so one of the things that we wanted to do was not only get feedback on our approach and our methodology, but in addition to a timeline that would allow us
113to not only bring in the data, but give opportunity for stakeholder feedback. Because one of the things that we learned in our methodology that it was a very quantitative approach. And one of the things that we received feedback in is that they wanted to see a lot more community engagement and opportunities for not only school stakeholders that once a school was identified but when the study was done for their voice to be brought in as community members throughout the process. So, we did look back at amending our approach and we reported to the board this past fall and we have made the agreement that we would look at enrollment data for this upcoming fall 2026 in order to make the determination on which schools that we would identify to be furthered studied looking at initiating
114studies and studying them looking to make recommendations the following spring. >> Okay. So, your folks report is going to be ready by the springtime of this year >> or fall. We are looking at identifying the schools to be studied and potentially having the data ready in the fall and having the list and initiating the studies in the spring. So around this time next year, we would be in the study component looking to hopefully by the end of the school year have the study completed. >> Okay? Because this bill as it's written, it kind of like is um like it's a all or nothing kind of a thing, right? So it doesn't give the legislature an opportunity to make amendments or anything like that. It's just take it or leave it kind of a thing. >>
115That that's what I think because this bill is modeled off the B which is a little bit different from our approach that the department um we shared with the board of education that we would like to take. Sorry, I think I might causing confusion perhaps. >> No, no, no, no. Apologies. Um, no. And and it brings me to my next point because it it it ex excludes uh elected officials, lobbyists, deploy uh employees of DOE, board of education, school facilities are in ineligible to serve. So, they're all going to be basically governorapp appointed >> in as as written right now this bill. So, who are you expecting to see on this board if it kind of takes out the institutional knowledge of maybe some of these discussions that might be able to be an advantage?
116I >> I think that's a really great question. I think that's one of the reasons in our amendments, we wanted to remove that exclusionary factor of a department employee. Um in previous committees we said we felt it was really important for school personnel especially uh um K12 administrator to be part of the commission because when you talk about programs and you talk about decisions and master scheduling and other things around educational outcomes we feel that people in those roles have the experience and able to interpret data and provide that feedback. One of the things that when I did stakeholder feedback with principles was there's so many factors that need to come into play into the study. um principles who attendance, how does that when you close the school, what is that going to mean for
117the community when now families have to drive and there's so much insight that they know at the school level and we just felt that's why if we were to proceed with this bill, we would like to see that exclusion be removed. >> Yeah. And I think that that's the the concern that I see is who who are you expecting to see at this table if you don't have the institutional knowledge and the data and the and the history and that kind of stuff. So, uh that was my question. Thank you, chair. >> Another question. >> So, why are we I mean, how different you think the numbers will look from this year to fall of this coming year? >> How different do the numbers would look? >> Because you're looking at enrollment, right? To determine
118which schools you're going to look at further. >> So, can't you already have a sense of which schools it might be already based on fall this year and based on the pattern maybe from the year before? that there are definitely we see the historical trend. I think one thing I do want to just note and we did see we take an official enrollment count at the beginning of each year. One of the things that we did know and we don't know yet if it's due to economic changes that are happening right now or um I know there was a lot of changes in some private school scholarships but from the beginning of official enrollment count to January we did see an increase in our enrollment and something that we did see that schools are projecting
119and it's an increase that is more trending more than we usually see in previous years and so it's something that we are looking closely at the enrollment and we felt giving one more year of looking at the official enrollment count would really provide us a better of a historical trend in regards to making that analysis. And I think one of the other things that we wanted to take into account too and I just want to be transparent on some of the challenges we see is that with a lot of development that's happening in some areas and movement our enrollment not only is declining but it's been shifting in patterns that um I think we are analyzing and we felt one more data point would allow us to give us the sufficient evidence in order to
120proceed further. >> But isn't that the natural flow? I mean, every year, one more year of data, it is always going to be better. And you know, if we have some tragedy that happens this summer, you're going to tell me in fall, oh, you know what? You know, we had a landslide or we had another fire or we had something and therefore, you know, we don't know the numbers. The economy is constantly changing. The federal constantly changing. So, you're never going to have complete data that you want. So, I'm saying that based on what you what you had in the this past fall, the year before to see a trend and not that you're not going to look at the numbers in >> that come in in September or August, but then you can be
121started already. you can start and you can almost pick out the 10 schools if that's the number or five schools that in that trend and when the numbers come out in August then you can say okay yeah this school maybe no but this school definitely I mean come on you you have a you have an idea right based on the current data >> no you don't have no idea >> I think there's definitely schools that are the potential Senator I I agree there's a you definitely there's trends that you already see. I think one of the things too that we are looking at is we wanted to look at trying to get the number of schools down the cluster of schools to study down to a low number as possible in order to give due
122diligence to we doing the studies. >> Yeah. But then you have to change change your your your requirements or change the the data points that you're looking for. Not necessarily just waiting for the numbers. See, the problem I have is they do DOE keeps delaying and delaying and then in the future we should have sent letters out for the bus companies years ago. We should have been doing this. We don't. We keep >> dragging our feet and we keep waiting for more data and it it it constantly changes. So some at some point we got to bite the bullet and you got to make the decisions. You know, it's going to constantly change. You're not going to please everybody. There's going to be people that are upset and I don't care what kind of deep
123dive we do, it's it's got to happen. So you guys got to pull the trigger. >> Understood. >> Sooner better than later. >> Understood, Senator. And I think one of the things that we definitely, like I said, we did our presentation to the board with an updated timeline and it's something that we'll make sure we continue to communicate with the stakeholders and keeping the ball moving. >> Yeah. Because I believe according to your report, the reason why school consolidation was even on the table is because you folks were looking at the past 10 years of uh enrollment decline. >> Correct. >> And so now we're shifting based on one year of an increase where you guys have been looking for the past 10 years. Again, kicking the can down the road, we're talking about continual
124operating budget costs. We're talking about staffing costs >> just to go year by year. Mhm. >> Um and so yeah, it's a little >> understood, >> frustrating. >> I I I hear you and it's something that we will continue the momentum on. >> So I'm trying to get to the bottom of what what is the policy right now? So I'm reading the BOE policy. So it says there's a trigger for a consolidation study. >> So are any of the schools? So I assume so I don't I'm trying to I'm it's murky in my mind of how you're picking these schools on a consolidated. Are you following the BOE policy on which schools that trigger the consolidation study? >> We our meth our current methodology does follow the existing does follow the triggers. What we did
125was we also identified um when we w communicated it, we identified what we wanted to do was bring the number of clusters that we initiate to study down to as smallest number as possible. But but isn't there a criteria of which ones trigger a study though? >> Correct. Under the board >> polic and I think one of the things but one of the things that we wanted to do was not just study schools individually but we want to study them in clusters because I think it's really >> but that's not what the policy says though >> but it's how we are allowed to does allow us to study them in clusters cuz one of the things >> is that in the policy that allows you to study in clusters. The study identifies you the study
126allows you to identify schools but we are allowed to bring in other schools into the cluster because when you close a school it's going to have an impact to other schools. So for example the last part of that HAR is you have to do the comparison of the school and the opportunities to its neighboring schools in addition to not allowing additional CIP or additional factors. And so for enable you to study that you have to look at it in regards to >> okay so how many how many are you studying at this point? Well, how many have triggered the consolidation study? >> I can't think of a number off top of my head. I have to come back to you. >> But you have a definitive number. >> There's if we look on previous data,
127there would be numbers that would be potentially is potentially triggered for study. >> Okay. So, how many years? So, so when it's hitting the three triggers, at what point do you know when to do the study >> or is it are you just waiting and being like, okay, maybe we should do a study and okay, let's go figure out what schools and do a study because I was assuming it should be a rolling basis on when the study should be done based on the board policy. Right. >> Correct. And I think that's one of the things that we did communicate to the field based upon the heart. It is something that we admit that in the past it became a thing that we did 10 years and then we didn't do again. But we do
128feel it needs to be a multi-phase consistent evaluation. >> So that's what you're doing now. Are you correct? Once once those three triggers are hit, you're doing the study. >> Correct. We're going to be starting to get into this process of whenever we have new enrollments and new projections. >> So when did that start? >> When did that start? We started doing the analysis last year and then we started rolling out the methodology with the field in regards to how we would take through this approach and then we're looking to now initiate it with this upcoming fall data. >> Okay. So, we're only one year into this then, >> correct? >> Okay. So, based on that >> Mhm. >> cuz we we should really know what the number is, right? I I think that's that's
129really important because we have to assess are you well on your way of doing this or are we not because I think this this bill to me the the whole crux of it is I think just it feels like we're not moving right. And I think I think the the you hit the nail on the head that the the natural trend is you're moving away from east Oahu probably into west, right? And yet we're keeping all these schools open and we haven't had some type of plan in place on how we're going to deal with this. I think the plan is oh we just build more schools um and then the operating dollars are you know it just keeps going up because you adding more schools. So I think if we don't see under and
130understand what the timeline and the plan is and I think then you have bills like this right that will then force the issue because I think part of it and I guess we got to bring up the board chair cuz I was unclear on what what the whole point of okay you want it you you want it to be educate educators to be making this decision but you also wanted to you know you also want something that's nonpartisan. So I don't know it's one or the other. I don't you know if but if the DOE is not you know moving forward I think that's why we then come up with these other things and so I think what you need to do is really give us what is the timeline that we should expect something
131to happen right and I get you only started a year before and I think that's whatever we we can't we can't change that but I think we need to understand when when do we see that action start to happen right >> that and that's senator very fair I I I completely I don't disagree with all of your comments I think those are very fair And maybe for me to clarify one of the things that we have reported to the board and after we did our stakeholder engagement and I do want to note and I think one of the things in this past year that we did take our time with but because we haven't done this in 10 years it was a very um emotional because process in the sense that people have very strong
132connections to their school and there were a lot of questions around what that process would look like and what do the admin rules um mean for many of our school communities. We did share with the board that we are committed to doing our enrollment analysis this fall, releasing a list of schools that would be studied and then identifying the studies, looking by the end of the year to potentially have the recommendation from the department to the board for action on what on those schools that are being studied for potential closure or not depending on what the study came about. But one of the things that we did spend a lot of time with is one, what are the different data points that we felt were important and things that we needed to make sure were
133part of the study component, but also like I said, um, not only finding that balance between the quantitative data points that need to come in, but the qualitative and what those stakeholder engagements beyond hearings would look like throughout that process. >> So, what's your role in all of this? Um I have been leading in the I've been leading in regards to determining our approach methodology and I'll be facilitating and rolling out the process for our consolidation. So I've been working and running all of our meeting stakeholder engagement. >> What what area on the on the um governance list are you? >> I sorry I'm the assistant superintendent for the office of strategy information and performance. And when you say we, who's we when you're talking about deciding you're going to use this list or this
134or who's we? >> Um people within the department. So people within existing employees within my team um depending on the data that we will be utilizing. So for example, when it comes to personnel, I work closely with um as Bacon and his team in addition to um facilities and other individuals. >> So at the end of the day, who makes the final decision on these stakes? the methodology. >> Yeah. >> Um >> the decision to wait for fall to get list to the Roman. Who makes who finally a final decision? >> The final decision that made the final decision we did um bring it. We came together as agreement with the executive and we presented it to the board of education >> and they decided >> we discussed it. >> You just informed them. >>
135Informed them. >> So but you made that decision. Who made the final decision to take that final thing to the board? It was me. It would be me with the support of superintendent. >> Okay. And you one of the things you said was that well you guys found it you haven't done this for 10 years and that it's so emotional but you knew that already. Did you know being emotional? You know that people are tied to their schools. Correct. >> Especially here in Hawaii >> of course. >> So again it's like what factors make not act quicker because you know what you have a bill like this now. So if we pass this bill we're going to put it in DOE. I'm not sure what that's going to do to to your planning, but every
136time you guys don't aren't proactive and in front of the ball, then the ball comes and it's going to be thrown in your court and then you have to deal with it. >> Understood. >> Um, so it's like these are the messages that are being sent like you it's not acceptable. to some of the delays that is going on when it's so crucial, the dollars are so crucial, the budget is crucial, everything and and DOE seems to just keep growing and growing and growing and there's no end to it. I don't know what we're going to do at some point. You guys talk about those things when you strategize and decide to wait. You guys consider all of this? >> I think And to be honest, Senator, our considerations was really looking and spending time
137and getting the making sure we got feedback from getting opportunity for all the complex areas and all of our staff um to get feedback was our priority at that time. >> I appreciate that honest answer, but I think in the future and it shouldn't even be in the future. I think it should be constant that you got to pay attention to the finances in your household. You don't make decisions not based on any finances, right? You can you cannot continue to to live and to take care of your family and do all that without considering what the cost is and what the finances. And yet we come into government, we get millions of dollars and we pay no attention to what the cost is and we just look in things in silos and decide to
138move on without any regard because it's not your money. It's not your money and and that has to change. That attitude has to change and it has to start with DOE from the top because there is consequences to the people on the bottom of the of the food chain. >> Understood. >> So what are the uh triggering factors that would >> merit a school consolidation? >> So according to our heart, it's oneird or more of the square footage in existing facilities require replacement or improvement to meet prescribed standards. One third or more available classrooms are in excess of the teaching station and educational program or enrollment decline in staff reductions have or will reduce the capability of the school to provide the range of educational opportunities offered at adjoining schools with larger enrollments provided. Preliminary
139data indicate that adjoining schools can accommodate any relocated students without substantial capital improvement expenditures for additional facilities. So those are the three criteria. >> Okay. Okay. And so you had mentioned that you had given a presentation to the board. >> Yes. >> Within that presentation, did you have suggested schools that might need to be considered >> at that time at that time? >> At that time, we did not. We provide that >> prior to then. Did you have >> prior to that? No. >> Okay. because I think to include a piece and I want to be very sensitive to the people that are very attached to their schools. Um I'm not sure how uh important putting the emotional piece in there in swaying that decision- making and how much it is actually costing taxpayers. >>
140So thank you chair. So is there a list now at that time and prior to that you did not. But is there a list now of possible school closures? >> At this time I do not have a list >> but you have I have the data that if I I needed to I could look at it and pull one. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. Last item on the agenda. House Bill 2300, House draft 1, relating to Department of Education Procurement, adjust the applicability of act 134, uh, to clarify the threshold for Department of Ed, procurement of local edible products and packaged food products, prohibits the artificial division and parceling of Department of Education, procurement of local edible products and packaged food products. And justifying on this is DOE Hello,
141Chair Kim, Vice Chair Kanani, members of the committee, Shantima testifying on behalf of the Department of Education. The department stands on our written testimony in support of this measure. This measure will allow us to pilot new items, purchase items based on seasonal availability, and supplement our local purchasing. Thank you for this opportunity to testify. We stand by for questions. Thank you. Okay, we have Bonnie. Good afternoon again, chair, vice chair, member of the committee. Bonnie Kquwayy for the state procurement office. We'll stand on our written testimony and thank the legislature for taking our recommendation to include language to prohibit against parceling, which is the artificial division of goods and services to avoid the procurement process. Thank you. Thank you. Brian Miamoto, Farm Bureau, a local food coalition in support. Amanda Shaw in support. That is
142all we have that signed up. Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing none. Uh questions for the Department of Education. Well, let me start with Bonnie first. That's simple. So, Bonnie, besides the parcel, is there anything else in this that concerns you at all on on this measure? Originally, we were concerned about the way the the wording was because it it said ex exemp except for provisions in 103D305, but I think that with this language um against the parceling that we would be okay with it. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you, Kate. DOE. >> So, how does increasing the threshold to 250,000 impact the procurement oversight and transparency? >> It just allows us to purchase more. Um, as far as this impacting our overall locally source, it probably won't have a significant impact on
143that. So, we're looking at more at using this to pilot different items uh to see how it fits with our menu and establish working relationships with individual farmers. >> So, I think we've had this discussion before. So, the threshold right now is what 100 >> 100 >> and I think we've talked about the fact that you can do that now. So what areas or what special local foods that you want? I know you folks brought a poi in the past and stuff like that, but that you cannot procure with 100,000. >> We're in the process right now of piloting the poi and then the next one is going to be local cucumber. >> So the vendors, you can't just do that with the with the vendors. >> We can. It just allows us to make
144a bigger purchase with the 250. What the vendors can get more than 250, right? You go to the vendors. >> Um, >> okay. So, you folks go through a vendors. I don't know why hot dog different vendors, right? >> For the distributors. Yeah. >> And they they buy they buy what do they have a limit? >> So, we can we can go through the distributors right now, but this is going to allow us to pilot with the smaller local farmers. Yeah. >> Okay. Did you read this audit? >> Yes. I mean I talk about the monies that you guys didn't even reach close to to getting local local food. So are you blaming this that that's the reason why or are you pointing to this as the reason why? Because if you haven't made an
145effort to reach even even the minimum I don't know how this is going to help. >> Yeah. No, we're definitely not blaming this for not reaching our goal. Um >> what is the problem? Why you haven't reached the goal? Um so there there's many things and thinking maybe we can schedule a separate uh meeting to talk about the audit but I think the the biggest issue would be so we do have a a plan in place to improve our locally sourced uh food on our menu. Uh the the three big ones that we've come up with since that that audit was done is our menu development. So we we need to incorporate more local items on the menu. Um, and we have a a really good collaborative partnership with multi-state agencies to map out the
146commodities to see what's available in what amounts um, and where they are so we can include those on our menu. Uh, for procurement some of the one of the big things that we're going to adjust with regards to like our distributors as you mentioned is right now for most of the items we cannot see if it's local or imported. Um, and a lot of is because of the design of our contract. We negotiate a certain price for each item. So, we've been trying to work with the distributors to help us meet our goal to increase more local, but there's no financial incentive for them to do that because they have to sell it to us at a certain price. So, if they buy the local uh the local one, it's not in their best interest
147to do that. It's much more financially beneficial for them to buy the imported one and sell it to us at the same price. So we're looking at for next year or the next contract is to have that bifurcated so we can see the local price of a say for a cucumber price of a local cucumber versus the price of a imported cucumber. So that gives us the authority to make that choice on which one we want to purchase and at least the distributor knows that we're going to um pay for that item. And the third big one is you folks are familiar with is the regional kitchen. Um, so the the big goal of that is it'll serve half of Aahu, all of central Aahu and Leo Aahu. What that does is it changes the
148structure. Right now it's it's not um an attractive structure for farmers to deliver small batches of food to multiple schools on a regular basis. For some of it's just not worth it. So what the regional kitchen does, it creates a central hub so that they can deliver large quantities of food which the regional kitchen can handle because they're going to be doing that volume of production of the big goal is when they service all of Central and Leeward they're going to be servicing about 84 schools. So >> then who who purchases and under what procurement amount purchases? >> Oh, those are going to be we're still going to have our distributors and also local farmers. So what this does is it allows us to work more with individual farmers in addition to the distributors. So
149if we have products that work for our menu and farmers that we have a good working relationship with, there's two ways we can go at that. One is adding those products to the distributors list or two is we can work individually with those farmers. >> And um how are you folks going to monitor compliance with the prohibition on artificial parceling of the procurements? Well, we're we're aware of parceling, so we'll be sure not to to do that. >> Um, how long is this contract you're in now? >> This contract, uh, right now it's year to year, but we can extend it for a few years. >> Okay. So, when you said in the next contract, when is the next contract? >> Uh, for next year. >> Yeah. But when is that up? >> Um, we're
150in the process right now. It's at the good to the end of the school year. Okay. So, if it's, you know, I was thinking maybe it's a fiveyear contract or three-year contract to but year to year. So, you could have made all of these decisions that the contract last year, >> right? Correct. Could have put the changes in the contract last year. We talked about this last year. Did you do anything since the time we talked about it last year to now? >> We haven't. >> Okay. Again, why? >> I I can't I can't answer that to that. Senator, >> who can answer that question? Um, I I can find out. What >> you mean you can find out? It's not with you then. It's with who? The superintendent? >> Uh, it was >> somebody
151above you. Who? >> Well, it was with me, but I've been on I've been in this position for 7 months now. So, I I can check on when it was brought up and why it was not acted on earlier. >> Okay, we can understand our frustration. >> Yes. >> Every year we come here, we have these bills, we defer the bills or whatever. We bring up the same issues. I recall the same thing. And then we come back again, it's the same thing. And then you guys wonder why we we get upset and we start questioning and grilling because the same thing over and over again. Very frustrating for us understand. I know it's frustrating for you guys to hear from us, but you know what? This is going to continue because, you know, audit
152after audit, the same kinds of responses we get from the auditor about DOE not being able to to give the numbers, not being able to show what the plan was. They don't have any method of doing this. It's the same thing. We've seen it in the driver's license, driving education. We've seen it in the um heat abatement. We're seeing it in this audit. You know, we have the Medicaid. I mean I keep naming it. Question. Go ahead. So Sean um recently we started construction of the regional kitchen in Wahwa. >> Yes. So, how is that going to impact how DOE um grows or has contracts with farmers to grow the products that we need that will be delivered to this regional kitchen on a regular basis, which will probably answer some of, you know, Senator
153Kim's concerns >> that we have >> contracts in place with local farmers that we know we're going to get on a timely basis. is, you know, of course, storms or whatever, you know, can happen, but >> that was part of doing the regional kitchen to cut cost and make sure we were giving our students good products. >> Yes, it's going to make a a big impact on our locally sourced food um because it's going to be a central hub to receive large quantities of food and it's going to allow us to continue with our distributors and also with with local farmers as well. So currently we have uh collaborative work that we meet with um the department of with DBED sear uh EDC department of a Hawaii Farm Bureau. So we collaborate on the our
154menu is going to drive everything because what's on the menu determines what ingredients you're going to have and how you going to incorporate local ingredients in that. So we can't develop the menu in isolation of the product. So this collaboration is important because all of these agencies are mapping out what commodities of the are there and where they're at and in what quantities. At the same time um we also share our menu with the farmers so that they see what the expectation and what the need is so they can scale up their product to be able to supply the kitchen. So um there can be a scale up even without the regional kitchen but the regional kitchen will allow us to scale up a lot faster just because of the volume that can be delivered
155to that facility. >> So has that those conversations already started to take place that the >> I'm assuming the facility will be ready by next year. >> So the facility will open uh fall of 2027. Uh well, it'll it'll open in June of 2027, but start servicing Lilya complex in fall of 2027. So, the conversations are have already started. >> Thank you. >> And we have a plan to kind of going off on tangent, but our plan to roll it out is when it opens in fall of 20 27, we're going to start with four schools in Liha complex just to get things operations going. And then every quarter, we're going to expand five schools. So by the end of the first year we'll be servicing all of Lily and Milani Wua. The second year
156we're going to expand to Aya Monalor Radford. The third year will be into Leroy district. So Pearl City W Pahu Nanakuli Wai and then the last year will be Campbell Cap. So in four years we're going to be servicing all of central and leahu. >> Okay. One quick question. So that's all fine and well, but you in the meantime, you guys just kicking the ball because you know that the kitchens are going to open before scaling up because again, we brought this up last year. So I hope you guys just not waiting for the for the um regional kitchens because the clock is ticking and the money is going out the door. >> Yeah. >> Senator, >> are you intending um do you believe that this bill is intended to help you folks meet your
15730% local food goal? I think the bill is not it's intended to help but not directly because 250,000 is not a huge part of 30% by 2030. So, it's more it it'll help, but it's more of the it allows us to pilot bigger quantities to to try things out to see how it fits with our menu and just establish relationships with with the farmers. But then I also believe that that 30% goal is intended to help the local farmers as well. So increasing the threshold to 250,000 um might kind of squeeze the little guy out, have the big distributors come in. So it's kind of getting away from helping the local farmers. >> We can still do smaller amounts, too. >> How often do you Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. It's it's it's tricky because a
158lot of it is availability and it's like it's just not an attractive offer for farmers to have to deliver like one case here and one case there. So, um some of it is depending on their they might have sporadic supply and this might allow us to uh pilot with some of those supplies as well. >> How often do you see if this bill passes the 250,000 how many times do you think you'll have to issue that? Is it a real barrier? >> I'm not sure. I can get back to you on that. I don't know what we anticipate for that. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Sean. Thank you, chair. >> Okay. Thank you. And thank you for reminding us that we need to schedule a recent briefing on this audit. Yes. >> Um so
159we can talk more about what's in the audit. >> Sounds good. Thank you. >> Thank you. U members, decision- making, I am going to recommend to defer all the measures on the agenda for decision- making till Monday. number of them requires a lot of um amendments. So I don't want to go and peacemeal it at this point and really thinking about you know how this works in relationship to some of the other bills that we passed. So it will give us some time to work on it and if you have any concerns or issues you can bring it up uh and then we can incorporate that into the decision making. Okay. So with that all measures will be deferred until our agenda on Monday. We'll probably do like a 110 agenda, something like that, after
160the direct hearings and all of those hearings. Okay, with that we are a journal number 229 here in this room. Anything else I'm missing?