EDU Public Hearing 03-16-2026

001Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to the Committee on Education. Hope you're all dried up from this past weekend. I understand we might be in for more rain, so hopefully we don't have another rain day. Two rain days in a month? Is that must be historical, right? So anyway, with that being said, uh you are here at the Committee on Education. Today is March 16th, 1:00 p.m. in room 229, and this meeting is being live streamed. Uh and if there's any difficulties, we will reconvene on Wednesday, 1:00 p.m. in this room, 229. And so, uh we'll want to let member um testifiers know you have a minute to give your testimony, and we will ask questions if we need more information. So welcome my committee members to my right, Senator Hashimoto from Maui, and to my left,

002Senator DeCourcy from Wainae. Senator Kidani is out ill today, so we wish her well, and um Senator Fukinaga may be in a little later. With that, we're going to start with our first item on the agenda, Senate Senate bill House Bill 1605, House Draft 1, relating to human and community resilience, appropriate funds to the University of Hawaii at Manoa, College of Tropical Ag and Human Resilience for the development of its Human and Community Resilience Institute. And first is Brian Miyamoto from the Hawaii Farm Bureau. Right? That way. I have you down as first. Who am I to argue? You're in strong opposition, right? >> Strong opposition. Thank you, Chair, members of the committee. Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. Sorry, Chair, I expected to go after the University of Hawaii. That

003would explain everything about this bill and then the the Institute on what day it is talking about food security and all those numbers. Uh what what level of food insecurity we have here in Hawaii, what level of nutrition security we have in Hawaii. This bill is is addressing trying to combine all the different programs and again food security, nutrition security. Now I was going to say I am the the role model for nutrition security and probably the the one that can best talk about nutrition. Um obviously. But this is extremely an important issue. We talk about farm to families, farm to food bank, but I think the university and CTAHR specifically go a long way in helping us become more food secure and more nutritionally secure. Doing the outreach and in combining these programs that

004maybe is a little bit more spread out than it should be. So again, we are in strong support of this this this measure and it is one of the Farm Bureau's priorities. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Okay, good job. We're going to have questions for you after. Okay, now we have the University of Hawaii. Parwinder? From the university? Aloha, Chair. And wise Aloha, Chair, and the members of the committee. Um thank you for allowing us to have this testimony. And my name is Parwinder Grewal and the Dean of the College of uh Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources. I just want to make a few points about the food and uh nutritional security in Hawaii. We are We have over 30% of our households still food insecure. The pandemic has been long gone and

005it's actually increasing uh since then. Uh what we are trying to do after the loss of SNAP and we lost 13 positions in that. What we are to do here is to combine our different programs that kind of either directly or peripherally focus on this particular issue so that we can have a more data-driven and community-based approach to this problem so that we can uproot the food and food and nutritional insecurity from our communities. Thank you so much. Okay, thank you. On Zoom, we have Hunter. He's He's on it? He's villain not present on Zoom, chair. Thank you. Don't know that I said that correctly. Uh and we have a number of others that sent in testimony in support. I'm not going to read all their names. Anyone here in this room that would like

006to testify on this measure? Okay, hearing none. Um Brian, why don't you come back up? I have a question. Members, we are open for questions. Maybe you can explain greater about the um nutrition nutrition security. Um you know, for all the time that I've been aware, I'm not sure um what exactly that we're doing when it comes to nutrition. I see so many people that and even our kids in school um not really eating the types of foods um nutritional food, myself included. Um so, can you explain to to me and everybody else about where our money's going and how is this nutrition getting to to the public actually? I I Thank you, Senator Brandy. I'm a local farmer. I think that's what this maybe can help address because we do want healthier eating. Um

007healthy eating should lead to better outcomes, less pressure on our health care system, uh creating better habits in children. So, again, this being a community-based, data-driven program can address. And we all want we want healthier eating. We want And healthier eating from the agricultural standpoint, we really translates into more local foods, local foods in our schools. >> data then translate? I mean, it's one thing we collect the data, we all know we should be eating better, we all go to the doctor, my cholesterol level is very high. Um part of it is is for everybody's knowledge is hereditary. Uh but yeah, but you know, my eating habits, especially during session time, um on the run, we don't get to eat normal meals. Um but I don't know how much data you're going to get that

008is going to change my my way of of eating. Thank you, Senator. I don't think it's just the data collection, it's the community-based component of this. And part of what the university does or CTAHR is their extension program. And so the outreach and extension isn't just for farmers and ranchers. They do have other activities that they can reach out. Uh example is their 4-H program also that we have at the University of Hawaii, um which works with not just our livestock students. People think 4-H is just, you know, things they see at the the county fairs or the farm fair, but there's also this nutrition or or um more um I wouldn't say home act component to 4-H. So it's a broader program. Sorry. Sorry, Senator. And so again, it is getting the data, working

009with community, and trying to um implement possibly some of these programs so that we can have better outcomes from from especially from from from our youth. Right? We start I just saw something recently about, you know, food uh school lunch or our food programs at in Japan and what they do. And the culture is created when the students are extremely young and they develop these better eating habits so that they have them as adults also. And you know, ideally, that's something that hopefully Hawaii could do and lead. Um so again, that's the nutrition side and then also has a food security site. But nutrition and and I think we all would want to eat healthier. I'm going to ask if you can come up speak. And how much money are we talking about? I know

01013 we lost 13 food educators and we want to get back these individuals. So how how many What are we talking about? >> Only 0.9 million dollars. I'm sorry, 9 million? >> 0.9 0.9 And it is a if I can address this particular issue um there is education component included in this which is to build capacity in K through 12 schools about nutritional education. That would be directly having you know, working with our Department of Education to include a required a module or course in nutrition and healthy eating and also um developing a master um education nutrition education volunteer program so that we can have sustainability of this program. Excellent. Because those people will be trained to go out into the communities where they live so that they can influence this aspect. So it is

011children's or you know, our K through 12 kids is the highest priority but also parents. So 4-H program is also included in this because they are doing lots of work now more and more towards uh teaching children how to develop a recipe, how to cook and uh so that early on they it gets ingrained that the healthy eating is important for their performance in the school and their development. Okay, so 0.9 million. Does that include the fringe and everything else that go with it? Yes. Point nine million. And that's sustaining every year. Correct. Correct. So, going to school, we had nutritional classes. We had nutrition. I don't know that that made an impact. Um and and more so today. Um back then, we had home economics and so we learned to cook or or the

012boys learned to cook um um in in those classes. But again, I I just have a hard time for that kind of money that when you say that, you know, we've had 4-H programs, too, when we went to school. And they still have 4-H programs. Um but when you say that the more data, community-based, I still don't understand um trained people going into the community, how that really translates other than education because you've got all of the advertising going on on TV, all of the sweets and candies and sodas and everything else that is out there. Um no matter how much the school puts out nutritional lunches, they get thrown away. And you still see the kids who cannot afford school lunches go to McDonald's or or fast foods. Um so, how does this actually

013translate into better nutrition? I mean, it sounds good. It's so hard to vote against something like this, but you know, when you come down to it, is the money actually the value of changing people's way of nutrition and eating that this is going All of these positions are going to change that. So, this approach is as Brian said, this community-based. We are bringing to bear our care centers across the state, 22 of them, so that we can engage with the local community in a way that it is a partnership. It is beneficial to both sides and provide not only the education, food as medicine is a one of the new programs that we are now working with the medical school. And this kind of approach, if the issues that are identified, we will pivot to

014address those as and assess our impact simultaneously. That's the difference moving forward. We believe we lost SNAP-Ed program because the impact assessment may have not been as optimal as we would have wanted. And this is an important issue as you as you know, it is something that we must try and we are trying to take a different approach to address this particular issue. Um we provide from our stations uh last year we provided over 20,000 lb of fresh produce to uh different communities, food banks on all our islands. And on Oahu, over 16,000 lb of food. So, what we are saying is if community identifies a community garden is needed in a community, we would enable our own place, create a community garden because it's one person at a time, changing lives one person at

015a time. It is not easy as you know, yes, people will ignore. The 4-H youth development program is also changing. It's evolving nationally. It was a outside the uh school curriculum program. Now it's entering into the school. The new movement, it will be adopted into the school curriculum, the 4-H youth development program. That builds leadership, that builds ability to take control of their lives early. We have to address this issue. >> should open it up to questions. So, when you're referring to the schools, are you referring to Department of Education? Um, correct. Any any local schools that we uh So, this program is going to the success of this program is going to be based on the implementation through the Department of Education. That is one component. So, I just wanted to highlight that component

016of this because it is also partnering with government institutions, uh government organizations to work collaboratively, take community by community, GIS-based, data-driven approach to address the hurdles that may be. Sometimes it may not be just food, but the people do not have a transportation to get there, or the access to food is not there, or the access is such that it is not healthy food. Sure. So, I think the concern I have is right now Department of Education is not meeting their own goals um of having local locally pro- produced foods uh 30% by 30 or something, 2030. Um, and then also uh I think we have a supply shortage here um with the amount of uh healthy selection of foods um to be able to supply families that would choose to have a better uh

017nutritional meal. So, I think that if right now the bill is calling for 12 positions uh and if I recall, uh there's no real data to see where local communities are at currently so that we can have a project a projected goal of this is where the community is at, 5% in this particular region is not eating healthy and that's reflected through all diabetes rates or heart, you know, conditions and and those kinds of things to be able to justify the bill that says by the end of 5 years we're hoping to increase the nutritional rate. Do you folks have any of those numbers? So, um we can put together because there are different agencies focus on their own piece of work. For example, on Big Island food insecurity is even higher than Oahu. So,

018information is available. We can bring it together. And that's where we want to start with this. Take that kind of approach. Build community leadership to address this issue. Otherwise, we just you know, 30% already we might be even higher moving forward. Yeah. Okay. Because prices are also going up. It's going to be hard. Yeah. But you're talking about also like teaching new habits and day-to-day lifestyle. So, that's an even longer um Yes, these are >> goal that you're trying to accomplish, not just putting the foods in front of them and saying, "Hey, you know, we're going to give you a a box of vegetables, you know, once a week." You know, that comes with the education of maybe cooking the right meals and so on and so forth. So, >> It is actually developing the

019taste for that. It is our own kids it it took time. But now they are there. It it's a it's hard, no question, but if it is parents, if it is community leaders, if it is few student champions, right? And governmental agencies, legislature, everybody working together to be able to address this issue. Only then we will make a difference. I give you that that everyone wouldn't ever comply or or eat You know, we all have our issues. I will let you know though if your program is kind of trying to be funneled through the Department of Education, I would have concerns about that. But thank you, Chair. Yeah, and we are working very closely with the department on the regional kitchen, the new recipes that we have created now. Um I hope that it will

020make a difference. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Real quick. So, I'm reading your testimony. So, you said 13 positions are gone from food snap or the Ed Ed snap. Is that what it is? Snap Ed. So, based on that I I would assume you're that's that's how the genesis of the 12, right? That you're asking for. Um it is actually quite a bit repackaged. It includes our forest youth development program because now we want to take that program to inside the school. Okay. So, yeah. But but what if you get some of the Snap Ed but money's back? We put the 12 and onto the general fund and then the money starts flowing again. Is there any overlap? So, only overlap would be our four community nutrition associate jobs. Only four of those. The approach

021that we are taking here Snap Ed at the federal level is no more. Yes. >> For now? Yeah, you can maybe put some money now in in in this this year. But that is then every year you have to find and scramble to find the money. And our goal is to actually train the trainer so that we can make a more sustainable approach. Not just the same person impacting 20 people a day or 100 people a month, that kind of thing. >> So so what if we don't start with 12? What would what would be the number other than 12? I I'm pulling together different programs from within the college to be able to bring everybody together. Right. So I So I think what would be prudent before we go to conference or if it

022gets that far is we need to understand what the options are, right? In terms of you know, if in the first year, second year, third year of the roll out, you know, in theory the federal funds are going to be revisited, you know, we could have a new Congress, new Senate, you know, next year. Um maybe some of these things might come back, but you know, it'd be good just to to understand, you know, what what what are the options we might have, but um I I think 12 seems a lot. I understand you lost 13, but I think we got to we got to think through what what what what can we give you in this in this tight budget year, right? Yeah, in the tight budget year, if you can give me those

023remaining ones later, I could live with eight for now. Eight, no, that's still a lot, but okay. Well well hopefully we can continue looking at that. All right, thank you, Chair. Really appreciate it. This is, you know, for for our people. How long have you been you've had um SNAP Ed from the feds? How long have you had the program? Over 20 years, I think. Okay, so over 20 years. So where's the data or how has that changed in people's people's eating habits? Uh there are data available. We can make sure we can provide that. Okay. >> Yeah. Because I really want to see the money that we're spending or going to spend, and what do we what Ooh, what is actually taking place cuz, you know, again, it it sounds good. You train these

024people, they go into the community, you talk about community-based, but you're talking about four people going into the community. Okay, so they go into Kalihi, they talk with, you know, the schools. The The schools should be the one implementing nutrition in the school program. I don't know why we need this these individuals to to include it cuz I know when we went to school, we had the nutrition, we had you know, all the families, all the different different ways to eat and so forth. Um but at the end of the day, doesn't didn't change the fact that my parents couldn't afford fresh produce. We ate canned goods, you know, we we we ate what we could afford, and even when we could afford it, it's it's hard to prepare. It doesn't People don't have the

025time to prepare. People are working, parents are working, they go fast foods, they buy, you know, chicken and fried chicken, they go to Costco, they buy, you know, they buy ready-made stuff. I mean, that's a lifestyle, and I don't know that having all of these funds and these individuals are going to change it until you change the world and and, you know, people's people's way of living, which people have to work two jobs and their families, and so they end up not having the time to cook nutrition nutritious meals. So, I just don't know how this translates, and my concern is getting the funding to the people who really need it at this point in time. You know, because people are living from paper paycheck to paycheck. People are not getting the types of support

026that they had, and the budget is so tight, and so, you know, what are what are priorities at this point? I know this takes a long time, but over 20 years we've had SNAP and and I don't necessarily see the impact that it has. Brian, if you relate to that? Thank you, Senator. Yes, we we get it. And and yes, but but we believe that this is an approach, as the Dean said, to start early cuz we need to we need to start somewhere. We got to address this. >> this program. And we hear 20 years of SNAP-Ed. And what are the outcomes? We understand it. >> Did you start 20 years ago on this? Um I mean, we've been talking about nutrition forever, right? Uh absolutely. And and I think with without criticizing anyone

027else, our Dean is fairly new. And so the Dean has an approach that he believes can help Hawaii, can help our Kiki, can help our future um by addressing nutrition. Nutrition, I agree. Um I We grew up eating canned goods, Spam and eggs for dinner. Um but we've got to address this and we think this may be approach. Understand that that budgets are tight and it is something we appreciate you hearing it, Senator, because this is this is a conversation that I don't think we're having now. We're having a lot of food security conversations, right? But to add in the nutrition component, which is critically important, and and how the agriculture can play a role in that, also. I think that's at least a conversation that we're happy to have at this point. The outcomes

028of of this program, it will be long-term. And that's why I bring up this up because it always sounds good. Nutrition, we're going to go into the community, community-based, nutrition security. I mean, all of these are good buzzwords, but at the end of the day, we know how how much is this really impacting? Are we getting results from it? And if we're not, then we need to really look at how can we best spend some of these fundings because this is once you do it, then, you know, everybody protect their jobs and you you can't change the program. >> absolutely very important questions. >> now we have a federal program and it goes away and we've relied on federals for too long for these nice to have programs and now you want the state to

029take it over and it's very difficult because you know, the pie is only so big and now you're adding on more. Who are we going to cut? Am I going to cut from our seniors? Am I going to cut from our non-profits? Am I going to cut from our our education? Where do I cut? The pie is only so big, right? So, where are we going to come up with the funding for these additional positions? And not for one time, but to protect in perpetuity it seems, right? Yes. And it's not because we're we're not sensitive to nutrition and people eating balanced meals. I mean, you know, we're we're all guilty of it. Walk in any of our offices, you're going to see a whole pile of of junk food. That's to sustain us during

030the session. But again, and and we're smart people. We're not, you know, I like to think we're smart. Well, Senator Dela Cruz, may We do want to change the world. We really do want to change the world and we have to change the world. We can start right here in Hawaii. Community by I got people starving. I got people that really need the funding. Um I don't know if that I priority would be right now to change the world with 0.9 million dollars at this point. So, >> It's it's a different It's a different approach that we are proposing and it is a through a partnership, not so much one side education. I understand. Well, maybe you can talk with our athletics because they want 5 million for sports. So, do we play sports before

031we do nutrition? How do How do we do that? Again, where are our priorities? Where should our priorities be? Our generation actually is healthier than our younger generation because we had nutrition education. We were doing labor. Yeah, but look how many people have cancer now. I mean, look how many people we don't even know if that's related to nutrition or not. Yeah, but Okay, let's not belabor this. Thank you, Dean. We appreciate the good work you're doing, Dean. Again, you know, we make the hard decisions on on what are we going to prioritize and what are we going to fund. >> Thank you. And we really appreciate the what you do, too. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Okay, Senate Bill 2171, House Draft 1, relating to the University of Hawaii, authorizes university to engage in

032enterprise-related activities for educational purposes under certain circumstances. Uh testifying, Denise Yoshimori Yamamoto. Denise, you're online? >> Hi. Hi, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. This is my name is Denise Yoshimori Yamamoto. I'm the Associate Vice President for the Community Colleges, and we support this bill. We're and I'm here for any questions you may have. Thank you. Okay, anyone else wishing to testify on this measure cuz Denise is the only one that signed up. Nobody else. Members, questions? I do. Who is this? You want to explain it? Uh Denise, again, what are the circumstances in which um you would do you would this bill would help? So basically, you know, it would allow us to really um bring hands-on experience on into our um onto our campuses. Um we we do things uh we do

033this already to some degree with culinary arts. Um we want to do this and expand it with hospitality. Um it's really creating these lab environments, and our students would have it almost like the next step before they get out into the workforce. Um our Hospitality Academy at Maui is a really good example in that with CIP, we did renovate the building, you know, we did the shell. And then what happened was we got our industry partners, the hot um hotels, to come in and sponsor the rooms and they outfitted the rooms at their cost. And so that was really good and that it saved us some money with the CIP, but it also provides our students with um you know, just an actual real-world sample room that they need to work in, kind of get

034trained in um before they can start doing their actual internships at the hotels. Um but what we wanted to do was be able to bring in now guests um you know, actual people from um the community into that facility. Um but again, it's it's in no way will it ever mean to compete with private sector, but it is it allows us at least to generate some revenue. Um but again, more so it's for the hands-on training. So why do you need this bill though? Can't you do that now? Well, what's happening is that um we have to go through actual hurdles just like any other commercial entity. We have to get the proper permits in place and things like that, which kind of drags it out. So it doesn't help us really to be to

035react as fast as we would like to. And so this this bill will definitely help us to um be able to pivot faster, to react, to work force and be able to support it cuz every time yeah, there's always the lag with CIP cuz construction takes so long, but just even aligning programmatically being able to start would be great. Okay, well, sometimes we we pass these measures that seems like it's innocent enough and then there's unintended consequences that happens. I'm looking right now where these activities authorized under this section shall be exempt from county zoning and ordinances, land use restrictions and requirements for special permits, conditional use permits, or similar county level land use approvals. I mean, this is broad broad kinds of exemptions, which I'm not sure um how that would into what would

036entail as far as some kind of activities down the line that all of a sudden we say, well, that bill was never meant for that to happen. I mean, I think that the the one hopefully will bring a little bit of comfort is just the fact that this was never on a campuses be able to scale up, you know, to be anything that is competing with commercial industry. You know, but again and but keep in mind too, this would not we did not intend for this to exempt us from any type of building permit, yeah. So, definitely if it's a kitchen or anything like that, it would be permitted as such and we would get the proper approvals for that type of operation. So, never to jeopardize health and safety. It's more so to allow

037us through educational use to to start our training start training much faster. Yeah, again, I just don't see how you you folks are doing it now. So, I'm not exactly sure perhaps as we move forward before it if it gets that far to conference that you guys can give us more specifics because to me this is about about language and that much of this you can already do. I know yeah, maybe it's not as simple as you want it to be. It it takes longer. That's all it is. Okay. But definitely we can come see you and we I mean we can we can give you more specifics. Definitely we work we'll work on that. I think this bill really needs that. Okay. Thank you. No? Okay. No other questions, let's move on. Senate bill

0381872 relating to the Board of Regents of the University of Hawaii exempts one strategic planning retreat of the Board of Regents per year from open meeting requirements if certain conditions are met. Requires member of the Board of Regents to complete a governance training and attend training at at least once every two years thereafter. Requires the candidate advisory council to ensure that all candidates presented to the governor for nomination have certain subject matter experience and are not registered lobbies who have lobbied on matters pertaining to the University of Hawaii exempts the financial disclosures on the Board of Regents as mandated by the State Ethics Code from being made public. Requires the Board of Regents in collaboration with the candidate advisory committee council to submit annual reports to the legislature. And we have a number of people

039signed up. Okay, Robert Harris for the State Ethics Commission. Mr. Harris, Thank you, Chair. Members of the committee, my name is Robert Harris. On behalf of Hawaii State Ethics Commission, we are opposed to specifically section 6 of this bill, which would re prevent the legislature, fellow regents, UH staff, or stakeholders from knowing of financial conflicts of interest on matters before the University of Hawaii Board of Regents. Removing this information means that conflicts of interest will not be identified in real time. It allows essentially for the Ethics Commission to try to identify conflicts of interest after the fact. At that point, decisions may have already been made and the harm to the public may have already been occurred. Eliminating transparency here solves a problem that does not appear to exist. There has not been a lack

040of qualified applicants for the Board of Regents specifically. However, the harm caused specifically with an institution that controls billions of dollars and is a central part of Hawaii's economy, eliminating the transparency, runs counter both to national standards and other similar institutions such as the University of California, which does also have public disclosure requirements. Thank you. Happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Ben Cripps in opposition from Public First Law Center. Let's see, just signing for the University of Hawaii Board of Regents, Gabe Lee, chair of the Regents. Thank you, Chair committee members. Gabe Lee, chair of the Board of Regents um testifying in favor of um this bill in particular the exemption from the Sunshine Law would um facilitate uh a more meaningful discussion among the Regents as well as management um

041outside of the rules of the Sunshine Law. Uh mostly one-on-one conver- conversations. And the exemption from the um public disclosure of the financial statements would um widen the pool of qualified applicants, especially in the expertise of large-scale organizational management, finance, accounting, and budget. Thank you. Uh we have let's see, Carl- Carlotta Amorino with comments from Office of Information Practice, Douglas Meller in opposition, League of Women Voters, and Sterling Morita for the Professional Chapter of Society of Professional Journalists in opposition. Anyone here else wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing none, uh members are open to questions. Um Um okay, so Gabe, if you can come forward. So, we're talking about a one-time exemption, right, for this retreat from the Sunshine Law? >> Um how long would this retreat take? I would say it would be

042a couple hours. Yes. Okay, so we're not talking about one day or one week. we're talking about hours. >> Yes. So, like an 8-hour period or 6-hour period. >> less. Even less. Okay. Um So, when you talk about the disclosure, I I know people complain about it. So, you're saying that if we didn't have disclosure, then more people would then apply to sit on the Regents? Yes. Um when the requirement went in, I think it was around 12 years ago, during Governor Abercrombie's term, we um the Regents lost two Regents um um before it went into effect. And um um when I approach people, especially um on the large-scale organizational management, those type of expertise, um the first thing they um talk to me about is the public disclosure of the financial statements. Now, um

043for me, I had um I was on the Board of Accountancy for eight years before that. So, I knew I was filing the public disclosures, and I knew what was disclosed. Um and when I try to explain to other people, well, your retirement accounts are in aren't in there, and your deferred comp is not in there, and all this is not in there, and the only thing that you're doing is your your taxable accounts and those type of things, they just say, "Forget it. I'm not going to do it. It's just um too much on the table for people to see." Okay. What You feel that it's been around for so long that seems like we are getting qualified candidates, but I don't know. You think people are now I mean, most of them are

044required now, right? Mostly the words, so I think we could get our uh um wider pool of candidates. Um Is that going to change how the board of regents approach things? I can't guarantee that, but I know it's a silly normal question, but uh Yes. Okay. Members' questions? No questions? So, the record Thank you. So, uh Chairwoman, you had mentioned earlier in your oral testimony that uh these retreats would require the board to have meaningful discussions. Uh also, you had shared that you can have more one-on-one conversations. What is preventing you from having those meaningful discussions and one-on-one conversations now publicly being documented? Um I'm concerned what those conversations would entail. The um Right now, we we really it's hard for us to get a feel of the entire board when So, right now, based

045on Sunshine Law, we have to talk to uh have one-on-one conversations and but to understand where the the body of 11 regents really feel about um a certain um topic, I think something like that is harder um in the in the public session. And uh especially open discussion with senior management. A lot of this is strategic. You know, this is just like the larger publicly traded companies, their strategic planning sessions um are not open to the public. See, you know how the Sunshine Law is really to gain uh public trust with the public. Um that's the point of Sunshine Law is to have those discussions. Uh so, when the comments are being made, uh so we can see where everybody is at. Um That's what open discussion is supposed to be for. It is so

046that not only can you guys see where everybody is at, so the public can see where everybody is at. And so I think that this poses a big threat to public trust. Also, the Board of Regents, you folks oversee billions of dollars. And so to exempt you from sunshine law to have those meaningful discussions and one-on-one conversations really does not signal to the public that transparency is important. Not to mention the financial disclosures not only identifies the financial part of it, but then the conflict of interests part. And so I think that that also is not sending a message to the public that we are concerned about transparency and we are an open book. Now, if that means that in your view or the members' view that we don't get qualified board members, qualified according

047to what standard though? Because to me, qualified means that you're willing to be transparent and accountable to the public. That's what qualified means to me. Now, when these terms are being used loosely, the public might get an impression that we're more concerned about ensuring that we have maybe special interests on this board or maybe members that have political ties. So, there's already so many negative impressions from the public when we don't have this kind of transparency. So again, sorry, back to my question. Um can you identify a meaningful discussion that you wouldn't be able to have documented? The um or or if say in a strategic planning session where the management comes through with their squats and they come up with the top priorities and um they want feedback from the regions on you know

048what what the priority should be. Um a lot of that is um is should be um I would say um if it was in the open session um it could be taken the wrong way. The um a lot of times it's just um discussion but it's not the whole group um wanting to go that way. And then um for um and then you know I'm on the sunshine law I really don't know if it really has helped um or hurt um the um transparency and the efficiency of um those boards. Do you think it's fair that if taxpayers are paying for the salaries of these positions or funding these programs that it would be fair to them that all of those discussions uh be public, documented and for everybody to take away I guess their

049own perception of it? Well, we put um items for approval and reporting. Those are all agendized and that's open to the public. But you know there's there's certain things or um really when it's um strategic and um and we're not getting anything approved, we just want to know how people feel. That's that's a that's a little different. Yeah, I'm I'm concerned with that use of term on how people feel. Um they're supposed to make their best judgment and decision based on the better interest of the public, not necessarily how they feel. So, I think it's just semantics that we're kind of going back and forth on, but I did want to um mention that I think passing this bill would really lose a lot of public trust. Um, so it might have a huge negative

050impact on the Board of Regents where there might already be a negative um impression uh on your folks' board and I would hate to have you folks uh be faced with any more contentious uh perceptions. Uh so, I'll just say that, Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Ethics Commission, please. >> Ethics. Won't you just stay there, please? Do you have more questions for Thanks, Executive Director, for being here. Um when I take a look at your testimony, so so just so we're clear, don't other boards and commissions do confidential filings other than, you know, I know there's a tier that a lot of public uh more you know, more public-facing boards and commissions that do public filings, but there's a whole bunch that don't, right? Absolutely. Um in 2013, this legislature made the decision to take

051I think what we had called the high-profile, the um entities that have more power and decided to make those disclosures public. So, it includes ones that you'd reasonably expect, Land Use Commission, Board of Land and Natural Resources, and the UH Board of Regents. There's there's uh approximately 10 others. Um other entities which may be um not controlling significant procurement, not managing people as actively, the idea is that they sort of have less direct um oversight of something that might be as of critical importance, those are confidential filers. Correct. Okay, so when you mean confidential, what does that mean? Does the public get not get to see them? >> does not see them, correct. Um So, they are filed only with the Ethics Commission. Ethics Commission would use that if there is a complaint or if

052there is an allegation, if there's a suspicion that there was a conflict of interest, we could then look at it and try to address it. Typically, that's a after-the-fact review. We certainly don't have the resources to attend 200 boards and commission meetings and be there in real time to try to address things. So, at that point, things are already have happened. And so, we have uh cases where, you know, millions of dollars of decision-making has occurred, and we are after-the-fact going after the employee for conflict of interest. So, are you complaint-driven, or are you are you actively looking? We do audits, but those tend to be um difficult. Again, with we have well over 100 boards and commissions. Um some of them, like the Board of Regents, has a lot of substantial information. Um so,

053for example, one property transaction might involve dozens of parties, multiple parent companies to be able to try to do that kind of review to try to identify specifically all of the potential financial conflict of interest in real time is very difficult. So, since the 2013 legislation passed, has the Ethics Commission done a review of if if it's if that legislation has done what it was intended to do? Yeah, so for example, last year we received six inquiries from Board of Regents asking about potential conflicts of interest. Um and essentially, I don't know if we would have seen those inquiries in the past. Um again, it's speculation, just to be very clear. Um but I think because there is transparency around both the financial interests and the matters before them, I think the interest in trying

054to identify the conflict of interest and do so cleanly, I think it's a lot greater as a result. And again, that's speculative. It's not a It's a not a qualitative response. Um but again, I think anecdotally we do see positive changes as a result. So, have you kind of drilled down what the concern is? Because maybe there's a hybrid model that we can find of it's still public, but there are certain things that are confidentially given to the ethics commission and stuff that is still need public, right? Versus, you know, everything is public versus everything is private. I think there's merit because I think one of the people that resigned back in 2013 was from Maui and I understand why. Um because I had a conversation with them, but I think I don't If there's

055been no review, maybe it's time for us to to take a look, right? I think it's a really great question and I think it's also an opportunity for education um too, and particularly to potential applicants who might be turned off. And I I really do want to hopefully seize the opportunity after this meeting to talk about that. We don't identify someone's personal residence, for example. We don't identify specific income amounts. We just identify ranges. The idea is, you know, and again, I think you're probably familiar with it as a legislator. Um the idea is we're just trying to show that there's a financial connection and at that point, we don't necessarily need to have any more specifics. We exempt a lot of information like as disclosed because again, it's unlikely to come up up as

056a conflict of interest like retirement amounts, um amounts in a bank. Those kind of things are all secret and are not revealed. Really looking for interests in a specific company or interest in property that might come before that board or commission. And again, that's described generally, right? So, we're doing our best to try and make sure we're protecting privacy, um but trying to make sure the information is available and in in many cases, it typically is the staff of that board or agency that needs to know it so they know if something's on the agenda that it's potentially conflict of interest. Stakeholders are involved in it. It's not public at large, but it's specific people. We thought about ways to just try to get it to the staff of the board, but once you've done

057that at that point, it's really hard to try to then keep that information locked just to that that group. Okay. Well, I think it's it's a good dis- discussion point, and hopefully this piece of legislation gives us the impetus to to take a look at what compromise that we can figure out if you're totally opposed to to this piece right now, then maybe we got to figure out, okay, what what Why does the board think they need this? And what what is some middle ground that we can potentially introduce in future pieces of legislation? But I think we are certainly open and open to input. I will note that, you know, approximately 40 to 45 states have similar public disclosure requirements, and we're right now doing a review of other universities. I've identified the University

058of Washington, the University of California all have very similar standards. So, I think this is sort of a national standard, to be clear. Um and the only thing maybe why it's in such a high context here is specifically for the UH Board of Regents that 12 years ago, 2013, we had that switch. And so, there's people who really remember sort of the distinction. But again, going back to point where things aren't revealed is is really definitely sort of moving in I don't I don't think anybody's saying that, but I think >> Well, this legislation is. >> Well, but the if if if you're going to if we're not going to find a compromise, then that's what it's going to be, right? Potentially, if we keep moving this bill. So, of course, hopefully we we can

059be more more proactive and take a look at what else can we do, right? Because if the solution is take it or leave it, at some point, you know, about the legislature is about figuring out, okay, what's the middle ground, right? Again, if there's a way to identify something, we're we're all ears, and I would not be opposed to it. I would, again, emphasize that um it does go to somewhat public transparency and accountability and confidence as was indicated earlier. And so, you know, there is that feature of it. So, I think it is identifying are we concretely losing people such that we can't find qualified applicants to be part of this process. Um and still trying to keep that level of confidence in the decision-making that's going on. Um And that is a balance,

060right? >> Well, it's always a balance and I think when you take a look at if if you saw what how long it's taking them to fill some of these region seats, they've just extended the Hoy region like three, four times, right? I think we're going to end up with that in the Maui region's position. And so, I think I don't know, but at some point we got to take a look at what are the levers that people are concerned about it because this is a salient topic right now that the board is trying to push, right? So, I I think we we got to look into it. So, thank you for being here. Thank you for the questions. Okay, I'm going to follow up on this if I can and then Um so, Robert,

061um right now, you folks get the disclosures, right? So, do you actually review the disclosures? You said you get it at We do this week. You see it at the tail end when there's a complaint. But, what do you do on the front end right now? So, about 2 years ago, um the legislature actually gave us money to hire an analyst who is doing um reviews of um spot audits essentially of different agencies and decisions made and then comparing it to the the disclosures that are made to try to identify things. >> Okay, can't they still do that if it wasn't public? The disclosure wasn't public? Big foot. I mean, so for example, we are pursuing an enforcement case right now and I can't give a lot of detail about it um of somebody who's

062made dozens of decisions with conflicts of interest and probably involved millions of dollars of decision-making. So, we will catch it. Right. >> But, it'll be 2 to 3 years after decisions have been made. But, that one individual, is their disclosure um public or not public? >> In that particular case, the disclosure was not public and the staff did not know. And um there was really no way to screen for these conflicts of interest in real time. >> But even if it was was public, they might not have gotten anyway. >> I think in this particular case, and again, I apologize cuz we're talking about something specific that I can't get into detail about. I think they would have known and it would have been prevented earlier in the process. And so, you know, when this

063case comes public, it will be something where people are going to ask legitimate questions about why wasn't this addressed sooner? Okay, Senator, that's the point. Is it fair to say that uh not allowing the financial disclosures as example to be public, um that it it would be difficult for us to identify on whether that Board of Regents member is voting in the best better interests of them personally or business-wise. That's another advantage that making it public is that conflict of interest and seeing on whether that member actually is voting in support uh of their personal or business interests. I I think you nailed it on the head. That goes to the core of public confidence and decision-making. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Mhm. Um so, Chair, as far as the the conversations, uh transparent

064conversations, of course, you know, we I certainly want the Regents to have these kinds of discussions and where we get to know their feelings and yet um we don't see that in in many of your your meetings and your hearings. Members don't bring up that the issues or it's not even put on the agenda for discussion. So, I think it goes beyond um exempting a a retreat from the Sunshine Law because in your normal meetings you don't get that kind of discussion anyway, right? So, you're you're saying that by exempting you from the Sunshine Law, we're going to see more candid kinds of discussions, but is that going to be then translate to more candid discussions in your regular hearings so the public gets to know why you folks voted a certain way or The

065a lot of the um um discussion happens at the committee level and when it goes on the agenda, um the there are committee members that will call the chair of the certain committee to just find out a little bit more information about the topics, but um and then or they just have more knowledge to ask questions during the committee meetings, but it's not by the time it gets to the board meetings, it's it's it's um um pretty well vented at the committee level. Well, I've watched the committee meetings, too. It's not always um that kind of Yeah. robust robust discussions that is going on, um which is especially in the budget. When you folks do the budget, it's not does not seem like you folks are really getting down into the actual issues as as

066to just to vote on the whole budget. Right? One one vote and I mean, that's kind of the process that has been at the board. Yeah. On on especially on the budget, um at that time, um Vice President Calvin Young would um have one-on-one meetings with the Regents just um to take on any questions that they may have. Okay. >> Before before the the committee Mr. Attorney, if they need to. Yeah, but then the >> public doesn't get to hear all of that concerns and issues that gets raised, right? Okay. Um, last question, Robert. So, you know, we have a bill going through that says that the uh shouldn't be uh active employee of the University of Hawaii to sit on the Board of Regents. Um, we have that with the Board of Education. And

067and uh do you have any opinion on that as far as conflicts that arise on the daily decisions they have to make as an employee? I know you're not prepared for this, but Uh, we've encountered it sometimes. There is sometimes been a constitutional prohibition on somebody holding a public office and holding a second public office. And so, there is that. Potentially questionable what position in play. So, I'm sorry. I apologize. I'm thinking out loud. Um Obviously, we have allowed people to make decisions when it applies to a general class, but if it's something that would um specifically impact them like a discrete class within um then we usually would insist that they would recuse themselves. So, when we've seen this kind of certain stance in other certain uh situations. Um So, uh it does raise

068more challenges. Um, conversely, I can also see the argument sometimes those individuals may have more insight as to what's going on at the body. So, I mean, I that's not a terribly helpful comment just to say, you know, it's a policy decision, I think, for the legislature. In certain situations, if the the their job is dependent upon the university, and if they don't necessarily go along with the general recommendations uh of the administration, that and it might not be a direct conflict, but the fact that there's this need to be agreeable with all of the all of the proposals that are coming forth. Do you see that as as a possible I mean that's the probably the reason why you know, the I think the commission to to select these nominees have looked I I

069don't think they've been as favorable to putting active employees cuz we've not seen a lot of them, but when we have seen it, it seems like that seems to be the situation and we often hear the word rubber stamp a number of the of the decisions on that. So Again, it's a nuanced issue. I think plainly if the administration were to directly or indirectly try to put pressure on somebody, that would be a fair treatment by the I I understand that. I mean so they should be prohibited. I understand there may be implicit um pressure that you know, the public potentially could see it. But that but those kind of this kind of legislation is helpful into assuring to be proactive that we're not in that kind of situation, right? And everybody's treated equally cuz

070you we are allowed retirees um to or people that have formally been with the university or with the OE to then sit on these boards and commissions. >> Mhm. Right. Certainly understood. I understand the complexity of it. Um it may be a slightly different situation where you have someone who is got tenure for example or some type of protection like some professors do. Again, I I I understand the point and why you would try to push for it. Okay, thank you. Members, any other legislative questions? If not, thank you very much. >> Thank you so much. Okay, we are on Senate Bill 1952 House Draft one relating to agriculture authorizes the issuance of geo bonds and appropriate funds for capital improvements for the University of Hawaii College of Tropical Agriculture, Human Resilience Agriculture Research and

071Extension Station on Kauai. Uh and then we also we have Harwinder Dean, if you could come forward in support or comments. Aloha chair and the members of the committee. I'm Harwinder Grewal from CTAHR. Um this particular um request that we have is for our Kauai Agriculture Experiment Station. Um I just want to highlight that this is our only functional station on that entire island for our research. And the number of buildings are very old and do not comply with ADA and also we have cesspool issues that need to be addressed as well. And we do significant amount of work there and uh I'm here to answer any questions just in case you have. Thank you, Dean. Thank you. Ramy Ramo Good afternoon, Chair Kim, Senator DeCourt. Ramy Ramo here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm

072Bureau. You have a written testimony in support and I think the Dean explained some of the needs of the station. Uh this is in line with uh the legislature's previous support in the past several years for our extension stations and and um two years ago, the legislature appropriated $2 million for Poamoho. Last year, $4 million for Waimanalo. And this year, we're asking for $6 million for Kauai. These extension stations and uh cooperative extension play critical role for farmers and ranchers and they're all kind of built around the same time and they all need some some type of upgrades. Important although not exactly tied into, we talked about the previous bill, but the important role that extension program plays, especially times like now, when we are having these the Kona low. We're we're thinking millions of

073dollars in in some damage from wind, floods, loss of power, and our extension service works directly with farmers and ranchers and can help identify what those needs are. Anyway, um again, very important program. We're in strong support. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Okay, thank you. Uh Hunter, on Zoom, are you here? Not present on Zoom, chair. Okay. Uh let's see. We had 19 in support, no opposition. Any members here, anybody here wishing to testify on on 1952 House Draft 1? Hearing none, questions, members of questions. Senator of the court, for who? Brian. Really quick question, cuz I don't think that this isn't the bill, but you did mention it in your oral testimony. Uh are you folks asking for 5 million? Is that the Did I hear you say 5 million? Believe that

074is the request. >> Okay. Okay, if there's no other questions, thank you. Let's move on. Senator of the Senate, House Bill uh 2005, House Draft 2. This is language access, Amy's favorite bill. Establishes a statewide language access education workforce development program, University of Hawaii, appropriate funds. And Amy, you are our first testifier in support. Did the House Bill not pass over? Yeah. It did pass over, right? Yeah, they they both crossed over. >> They both crossed, okay. So, the Senate bill crossed over as well. And this is the House bill. And I believe there are no amendments either. Okay. >> at this time. So, you'd rather have the Senate bill, right? Yeah. Okay. I have no questions and Um thank you for um hearing this bill. Um it it's an important bill. It increases language

075access mandates and other things, but um wanted to just highlight that our as you all know our community is diverse. 20% nearly 20% are foreign-born and um of the state population about one in four speak a language other than English at home and about one in nine of our population speak English less than well and are called limited English proficient speakers and I I list here all the languages. I can't list them all, but are spoken in our multilingual community. The good thing is that we also have um students now being certified in the Department of Education as being bilateral and they get a very special certificate if they speak two languages, Hawaiian and English. They could just do Swedish and German even, but Ilocano and English and and Spanish and English and they they

076are uh have a credential on their high school diploma and they many of them are now going to the campus enrolling in UH campuses. We also have wonderful um uh uh uh classes in many of these languages and competent speakers. Uh and so we have competent people, but they also need training if they have to translate and interpret. Just because you speak that language doesn't provide you with enough uh skills actually to be efficient and and and and clear and accurate. So, what this does is actually does good things. It brings people who have some language skills already to be trained, and we have our community that really needs translation. For example, uh the floods or hurricanes, hardly anything is translated, and so you can imagine how difficult it is in English. You still get

077wet. Um but anyhow, um we believe that uh a program like this meets our community's needs, and also we have expertise at the university, and so we support it. >> And we supported it going over, so okay. Thank you. Deborah Halbert for the University of Hawaii. Oh. >> Sure. Um Senator Dela Cruz Al Geria, on behalf of the university, our Vice President Halbert just had to walk out, Okay. but we'll stand on our testimony. Okay, got it. Jade Butay. Aloha. Aloha, Madam Chair Kim, Senator DeCourt. Uh I'm Jade Butay, Director of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations. Uh we stand on our testimony in support of, you know, this initiative uh builds a pipeline of bilingual professionals uh ready to serve our diverse population. Thank you for the opportunity. Thank you. I wish I

078was bilingual, but I'm not I'm not. Uh last then, Shane. Shane, in support for the Hawaii State Commission status of women, not here. Uh let's see, Christine Andrews. In support, by Zoom. Not on Zoom, Chair. Not on Zoom. Okay. Michael Gollobich. Also in support, on Zoom. Not on Zoom, Chair. Uh Mike Nugent. Zoom. Uh also not on Zoom. Marcella Aholani Boido. Not on Zoom. Okay, then we have one more >> chair. We do have Ms. Marcella on Zoom at the moment. >> Welcome, Marcella. Go ahead. Thank you. Um I want you to know that I submitted my testimony to a person I was just sharing it with a member of the advocacy committee of the National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators. And they asked me for permission to post it on their advocacy page

079as an example of good advocacy. What this signifies is that my opposition to thinking that a generic training is going to produce competent interpreters and translators is in fact the national point of view of the national profession of interpreters and translators. We base ourselves on the passing tests of ability as interpreters and translators. Generic trainings are useful in teaching ethics and procedure, but they don't produce people who are actually competent to do this kind of very important work. So, I want you to know that I didn't actually intend to have my testimony go national, but that's what's going to happen. Um both my previous testimony and the testimony that I have submitted today to this committee. So, the reason I chose to comment rather than to oppose is because I do um sit in with

080the Hawaii Coalition on Immigrant Rights, and I have great respect and aloha for the work that they do. I've known Amy Agbayani probably longer than she or I would care to admit, but let's just say that it's in decades. And I have great respect and aloha for her, too. But, I think it's really important for us to understand what's real and what's not. And generic trainings do not produce people who are competent to interpret and translate. You generally need language-specific trainings, and the University of Hawaii's system does not have the people on board to do this right now. Plain and simple. So, I also would like to point out that I think the Seal of Biliteracy Program is a wonderful thing, and it has my wholehearted support. But, it is a far, far away from

081being the only way in which people become a bilingual. I, for example, grew up speaking both Spanish and English. I passed out of my high school requirement on foreign languages by taking a test. I did the same thing again at university, and that freed me to take upper-level division courses in Spanish, which I enjoyed very much. And like most interpreters, I fell into interpreting. It wasn't something I had planned on. So, I would also like to point out to you that these people who are coming up through this system, who are bilingual, have the same right to dream of other careers, careers where they could actually make a living. Which is >> Marcella, I'm going to have to ask you to summarize. Thank you. So, my my My comments on this bill are targeted at

082the issue of generic trainings. We need language-specific training if you're going to produce competent interpreters and translators. Okay. Thank you so much. You're welcome. Uh let's see. We have 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 others that have um sent in testimonies of support and one um it comments, anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing none questions members, any questions hearing no questions. I assume Senator Hashimoto has no questions on this bill. Okay, thank you. We are moving on to Senate bill 2139 House draft one. Invasive species appropriate funds University of Hawaii to conduct a study on effective treatment methods to reduce population of the Queensland longhorn beetle. First up is Patrick Chee from the Department of Land and Natural Resources. Aloha chair, vice chair, Senator DeCoite. I'm My name is Patrick Chee.

083I'm from the Department of Land and Natural Resources and the Hawaiian Invasive Species Council. We are in strong support of this bill. The Queensland longhorn beetle is a significant threat. It is known to bore into and at sometimes possibly kill a number of species, many of them important to agriculture, our culture, and it has been found in our our native plant ohia. So, we really do feel that it's important for there to be further research into the life cycle of this this beetle and to find out that if there are any other techniques and control efforts that we can do in order to make sure that the Queensland longhorn beetle is controlled and contained. Is it related to the rhinoceros beetle? It is not related closely related, but unfortunately it may have just as much

084impact or more because of the breadth and the width of the numbers of species that it is currently being found to impact. So, if we can get a handle of it, uh this would be something that that we should try and do as soon as we can. So, >> Okay, thank you. Um for Hawaii Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity. Did not get a name. Oh. Good afternoon, Chair, and uh members of the committee. Hanalei Han Pest Control Branch Manager. The department stands on our written testimony uh in support of the bill. Okay, thank you. Uh Brian Miyamoto for the Hawaii Farm Bureau in opposition. See, that's going to stay with you now, Brian. Thank you, Chair, members of the committee. Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. You have our written testimony

085in support. This is a bad one. LFA >> right? CRB, CBB, CLF, MFC, RRP. We're getting too used to to these abbreviations for pests. This one is bad. You heard Mr. Chee talk about the breadth that can impact ulu, cacao, avocado, citrus, hibiscus, kukui, just to name some. Agriculturally and culturally important crops in Hawaii. It was found in Puna. There's presence in Honoka'a. We've seen it with other pests, where it starts somewhere, we don't put enough attention and resources to it, and then it spreads island-wide, and then it spreads statewide. We can't afford to keep combating pests. We don't want to come back to you folks in 5 years and hey, can we get some funding to try to mitigate or control some of this? Let's control it now as soon as we can. Let's

086put some resources there and see if we can eradicate this thing. This is a bad one. And this is just another one. And just for the information, LFA, little fire ant. CRB, coconut rhinoceros beetle. CBB, coffee berry borer. CLF, coffee leaf rust. MFC, macadamia felted coccid. And RRP, rose-ringed parakeet. This is another one. This is a nasty one. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Okay, thank you. Stephanie Easley. Stephanie, go ahead. Hello, chair Kim, members of the committee. My name is Stephanie Easley with the Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species. You have our written testimony. We want to thank you for hearing HB 2139 today. Echoing the comments made by previous testifiers, this is a bad pest. There's over 20 identified host species of agricultural and cultural importance. We hope you'll move this one

087forward. Try to get some techniques to control this pest and hopefully eradicate it from Hawaii Island, but certainly from prevent it from spreading statewide. I'm here if you have any questions. Mahalo. Thank you, Stephanie. Becky Ostertag. Yes, aloha. My name is Rebecca Ostertag. I'm from University of Hawaii, Department of Biology. And we have We stand by our written testimony. We've done some preliminary work testing a biocontrol, the nematode biocontrol. And we've had success with it on a relatively small sample size, and this funding would help scale up the research. We've worked on kukui and ulu. For kukui, using the nematode biocontrol, 76% of the trees improved with the biocontrol, and 15 stayed the same, which is also good because they're not getting worse in terms of killing the trees. We've seen death of many of

088our trees with this. And for ulu, 80% of the trees improved with the biocontrol. So, we have some promising results, and this funding would pay for a full-time worker and a part-time worker to support the research to scale up the methods. It's a low-tech, low-cost solution, but it needs more research to be wrapped up to scale to be able to be available to farmers. And I'm happy to answer questions if if they come up. Thank you. Emma Ross. Steerhoff. I hope I said that correctly. Emma >> Aloha chair, vice chair, members of the committee. My name is Emma Steerhoff. I'm a lead ecological technician at the University of Hawaii at Hilo. I'm here to express my strong support of HB 2139, which will allocate funding to essential research that is needed to address the growing

089threat posed by Queensland Longhorn Beetle or QLB. I stand on my written testimony in support, but I also want to highlight the urgent community need for this research. As QLB spreads across East Hawaii, it has been devastating to farmers who are losing cacao, citrus, avocado, and several other crop plants to these larvae. It has over 20 known hosts in Hawaii. The nematode biocontrol developed by USDA is effective against QLB, as Becky mentioned, but the existing method of injecting the trees is very time-intensive. Community members want to implement this, but don't have the capacity to do so at the necessary scale when dozens of their trees are infected. We're confident that this research will result in well-informed, more time and cost-efficient methods of treatment. This, combined with substantial community buy-in to the biocontrol, will lead to

090far more effective control of QLB in East Hawaii, reducing damages and helping prevent its spread to other islands. The cost of this research pales in comparison to the losses producers will face to QLB if it's left unaddressed. This research will also reduce the cost of future QLB control given that it will require less manpower. This is a small investment that will greatly benefit the future of Hawaii. I'm happy to answer any questions. Mahalo for your time. Thank you. Hunter Hevlin Not on Zoom, chair. Okay, Layla Shapiro Aloha, Layla. Aloha, my name is Layla Shapiro, and I work under Dr. Austerlitz along with Emma, where my focus is on QLB and the use of nematodes as a biocontrol. I strongly support HB 2139 and stand on my testimony. QLB, as people have said, is a generalist

091pest known to target and often kill nearly 20 host species. And when injected into trees, the nematodes that we use are able to kill these larvae. This method has been extremely effective, as Becky pointed out. However, this treatment is very time-intensive, which is why it is essential that we invest in research on different treatment methods so it can be scaled up for farmers with hundreds, if not thousands, of trees. This biocontrol offers an opportunity to be proactive about managing QLB populations before it spreads to other islands and causes widespread devastation like we have seen with the coconut rhinoceros beetle. It is already rapidly spreading across the east side of Hawaii. And we need to stop the spread immediately. So often with these invasive species, it is too little, too late. But now we have a

092chance to actually combat this growing issue. Along with funding research, HB 2139 would allow us to continue our outreach and community involvement in this project. We have led treatment workshops at OK Farms and Hawaii Academy of Arts and Sciences to teach community members how to apply this treatment because there is no way we can fight this beetle without the community being able to treat their own trees. We have also worked with middle school and high school students, working with them hands-on to treat trees themselves and collect long-term data monitoring their infection and health has shown them how everyone has a kuliana in protecting our ecosystems, and we can all be a part of the science behind it. I've heard the excitement in their voices when they report back to me that the trees on their

093campus are doing better. This is getting them direct experience in science and aloha in their work, and is also helping to save these trees. Taking action against QLB is essential to our environmental health, food security, and cultural heritage. HB 2139 Please authorize, please. Yes. Please authorize. Okay, I'm following. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Uh Eric Tanoy? Not here. We have six others sending in testimonies in support. Anyone else here wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing none, members, any questions? Yes, go ahead. Adapt, please. Thank you. This bill is to get a study started, yeah, but do you folks have any solutions right now? Do you Do you have any path forward? Because I'm afraid that the study is going to take so long that it's going to jump over to other islands, so Currently,

094no. And in fact, right now, working with actually Becky on to fund a project similar to this, actually, to help them start on this. So, hopefully, whatever the results they get from this particular project with her is going to help to complement the work that they're going to be doing if this you get funded. >> Oh, so this is is going to partner with another project? Is that what you're saying? >> my understanding is that right this this Currently, I'm working with Becky on a project on a contract for them to start this project. >> Right, but this Yeah, but this is just to study it. I think the question is What What is the department doing Right now, nothing. So, Nothing. There is nothing you can do? I mean I mean in terms of

095treatment, no. We have not We have no treatment available right now. >> Where did this beetle come from? Queensland, Australia. I know I heard it. Do you know how it got here? So, I am I don't know. This happened Okay, my understanding is it was detected back in 20 2009. And then it was by Bishop Museum. And then We did nothing since 2009? >> Uh, I can't speak for what happened back then. I joined the I I I I joined this this position last year May, so I'm inheriting this. Uh, so I'm trying trying to do now is to uh at least help to spearhead this. Um, so yeah, so it was detected back in 2009 and then for a brief period of time was it was it wasn't in detect detection until back in

0962013 and 2014. >> Cuz you guys are asking for a position, yeah? Or no? No, position just >> is to UH. Oh, yeah. To UH, yeah. Um, so my my concern is that well, how long will the study take? Do you guys have a deadline on that? >> Actually, this is quite promising because they they they're working with um a a local strain of uh uh nematodes. So, I believe they do have uh preliminary study uh results already. And so, it's quite promising and that's why I'm working with back here. Uh So, no idea how it's getting transferred within the state I mean, sorry, within the island of No, it's I I don't have information. And and and the and the true and manner is also I'm trying to establish um to survey the modest

097positions to help to get information like that. So. >> Yeah. So, let me continue on the questioning. How does How do they handle this in um Australia? Well, because Hawaii's unique because unlike Australia, they do have their uh natural predators. So, but we don't have it down here. Same thing with coqui frogs in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico, you have uh natural predators over there, but when they come over here, there's no natural predators and so, we're stuck with Yeah. What are the natural predators for this beetle? Uh this one, I got to check and get back to you. Okay. Well, it's very troubling to know that this beetle has been here since 2009. And then, you know, all these years have gone by and only now we're studying it. Only now we're getting to it.

098Why why is that? Who Who drops the ball on this? Well, Well, chair, um we don't know. I mean, I I'm just new in this position myself, but um the thing is that the invasion of various things, it takes a long time for it to get to a point where it is, an inflection point where more people notice it. Uh so, the fact that no one has >> It's too late by then, right? So, we know that the we know that the tree snake we get one tree snake found and we better get going, right? Not we, two more people recognize it. So, when the first beetle, and I can see, okay, 2009, but by 2013, you would think that, you know, more more is going on and that we I mean, the good thing

099is that the the research I mean, there there's significant research and this nematode is identified as a a means to potentially control the beetle, but I mean, ideally that we we would, you know, have, you know, some, you know, exploratory, you know, bio- biological control folks going out to Australia and seeing what is, you know, is keeping it in check, you know, in Australia. So, I don't know if that's something that we should, you know, work with Department of Agriculture in order to do, um but >> Am I allowed to comment on Zoom? No. Oh. Um so, when we, you know, just because you folks are new, and I understand that, but the beetle's not new, and there are many people that have been in the department for for a number of years, right? We

100have people that's there for 20, 30 years. So, I'm just concerned that these kinds of things get caught when it's kind of late already. So, if we we knew this was we knew the beetle was so devastating when it first noticed it, then we should have started doing stuff, right? We should have started making sure we have things in advance, have studies done, so we could react quicker. But we wait. We always do that. We wait. I'm not sure if we wait till the coconut trees are all dead. Right? Yeah, and and we're waiting because we're doing studies to keep studying, to bring the solution, and then to respond. So, when we found out about the CRB, we're monitoring, we're putting up those lanterns, we're doing all of this data, but then the conditions are

101so bad at this point, no none of the coconut trees can be salvaged. So, hopefully we can replant, but um I think my concern is just that how long is this study going to take? Do you have any solutions? I mean, how hard would it be to start to collaborate with the other side? I understand they have those species that are taking care of it naturally. Uh because we don't have that, there must be some kind of other natural way that we can take care of that. So, um yeah. Any idea of what the other nation's is? >> Um I will We will get to you. If you'll just be patient. Thank you. Okay. So, So, the natural way to get rid of this is Okay, we'll take a short comment. Who is this? Um

102This is Rebecca Uh this is Rebecca Ascher-Tag, University of Hawaii at Hilo. Um the issues are that until we have the the research This research is on finding solutions to for the management and control of the pest, and right now we don't have that. So, I understand the question is, why did it take us so long to want to find a solution? Yeah. Well, that's a common problem across uh all of the work in invasive species. Many times invasive species get to a place, they're undetected or at low levels, and they explode at a later point. Um and then when that's when we realize it's a problem. So, we need constant monitoring, research, and funding to be dealing with Hawaii's invasive species. Right. Well, what we need >> is that the you know, Hawaiian Invasive

103Species Council and the what are the various island invasive species we have early detection and rapid response. Um and a number of these species don't get to this point. You know, the fact that you don't hear about, you know, more QLBs, you know, happening is >> Yeah, but you know, not today, but you will hear it about maybe tomorrow. >> No, no. What I'm saying is that there there are, you know, a number of weeds and insects and whatnot that have, you know, that are being addressed, you know, soon after they come or even before they come. And so, it's just that this one, unfortunately, is is, you know, beyond that that of being early detected and eliminated before it becomes a significant problem. Well, and that's the point. The point is when we when

104we first see it and then we monitor it and then we need to then be proactive instead of reactive, which is what happens. We wait till it reaches to this point and then it costs so much more to eradicate. Well, and the the other thing is that, you know, in its home range, QLB is not an issue, which is, you know, which is, you know, partly because it's, you know, got natural enemies there. And so, the fact that it is an issue here is you know, it it is unique, you know, in in the world because >> Well, did it come in on some plants? We don't know. Well, it had to come in somewhere. So, what would be best guess? Oh, it probably came in on, you know, logs or something like that. Yeah.

105So, we're not doing good enough job in in uh preventing these kinds of things from coming into the state. Our agricultural farms, our agricultural um detection is not working. Right. And you know, the biosecurity, you know, should there be, you know, organic materials coming into the state, there should be certain uh things that we do, you know, to say, you know, maybe they need to be sterilized before they get here. Well, but then that's why we look to you guys for these recommendations or these measures to come before us so we can be proactive because none of us are experts in this field. None of us knew about this beetle in 2009 or 2013 or even in 2019. So, those are the kinds of things that, you know, that's why we have the departments and

106we have the heads of the department so that you folks can be the ones to be proactive and tell us, "Hey, we need this to happen." and not wait till the last minute. I mean, not just the last minute, but wait to the point where it's going to be devastating or could be devastating. Well, that and we also need cooperation from our federal partners who uh have various levels of >> But then you guys got to let the legislative body know so we can go ahead and make sure we have the cooperation. So, do you understand that? That's what we're looking for. We're looking for you folks. Now, if you're ringing the bell and we're ignoring it, then it's on us. Right? So, if but if you're not ringing the bell, then we have no

107way of knowing this needs done. And you folks ring the bell, but you guys ring it too late. I shouldn't say too late, but you you you ring the bell, but it's like it's getting out of hand already. Right? >> I don't know exactly what happened back then. Maybe they did I mean, I'm just trying to be fair to everyone, but Yeah, okay, but then why don't you research it when you come to us and say, you know, back in 2019, we got a bill through the legislature and you guys didn't do anything. You know, cuz so if you can do your homework and, you know, help us, so we know what what the problems are. And then also there have been several committees that have been formed due to invasive species like the Oahu

108invasive species committee. I mean, there's multiple per multiple. So, has anybody even at least started the work out of good faith to get ahead of it or do you need to do a study to pass a bill and get funding? Excuse me, hold on 1 second. Please let me get my um thought out. Uh is because when I first asked you folks if there were any solutions, you said no, um that you're just learning about it. Oh, okay. You did not. Correct, Deb. You did. Okay, so so we already have committees that should be in front of all of these invasive species. Um so, again, I feel we're delaying the solution by creating a study to therefore create um a bill, appropriations, then do we have to create another department? I mean, somebody should be

109getting in front of all this. So, can Oahu invasive species committee and other affiliated organizations like them can they just do the work without the appropriations uh without having it be specifically targeted to that, but just encompassing? Well, definitely the Big Island Invasive Species Committee has been paying attention to this. Um and you know, with the Hawaii Invasive Species Council have, you know, funded them to do, you know, some of that work. Uh and that's been ongoing and they've of course been working with University of Hawaii Hilo uh um in order to address the issue. But, you know, having >> they have solutions? Right. That That's the That's That's the nematodes that they have right now. Um uh that's the the closest that we have at this point. Uh but, if we can have, you

110know, further funding and research to figure out, you know, more about what, you know, could potentially control them, you know, that would get us beyond the point that they have right now, which is, you know, a very time and labor-intensive way of trying to address the issue. So, if we can figure out something else easier, that would be great. >> You're asking for how much money now for this study? I think it's a hundred thirty No, they added back in in the the the like last uh S A D something something. What I saw >> when would the study start and when would it end? Um can I ask that? I am. May I speak up? I can answer that question. When will the study start >> that question. Okay. Uh my name is Anne

111Kierhoff. I work under Rebecca Ostertag. Um With all due respect, I think we're getting away from the topic of the bill of it, so I'm happy to reorient us. Uh this is funding >> answer the question? Can you just answer the question, please? The The research would start as soon as we get the funding. Okay. And how long would it take before we get any results or Within a year. So, 1 year from now, should the money get uh appropriated in this budget cycle, a year from now, you would have results from the study. Yes. So, as um the Department of Biocontrol mentioned, we are working with them to do a study on more efficient treatment methods. There is an existing treatment for this with the nematodes, but it's very time intensive. And so, we

112are trying to improve these methods in order to scale it up. And that will allow us to implement this at the necessary scale to really control QLB. Okay. And we anticipate that we will get enough out of this study that we wouldn't have to do another study after another study. Yes, and it will reduce costs as well for future QLB biocontrol. Okay, thank you. Okay, are there any other questions? Okay, thank you very much. Okay, moving on. We are on House Bill 2158. Requires the University of Hawaii system to collect, maintain, and publish standardized program level data for each academic program offered. It requires maintenance of an online dashboard with program level data. It requires an annual report. Deborah Haller Albert to testify. Good afternoon, chairs, vice chairs, members of the committee. Debbie Halbert, vice

113president for academic strategy. We'll stand on our written testimony, and if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. Madam chair, I'd like to have other testify. Hold on 1 second. I kind of lost my place here. Okay, anybody else here wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing no others, so Deborah, you want to come back up? So, can you You're obviously not in support of this measure, correct? Well, we have a lot of comments, in part because of the way our data infrastructure is is set up, and the fact that we are undergoing a variety of different data transitions internally right now. And it in part in part is implementing some internal dashboards, but of course we agree with the intent to make sure that we are presenting publicly as much data as

114possible about the successes of our students as well as our programs. So, that's not something that you already have? We do have a variety of these pieces. So, on our website now you can find out all sorts of information about retention, graduation. We also have a really, I think, exciting dashboards, which is mentioned in the testimony, the secondary employment outcomes, post-secondary employment outcomes, the PSEO database, which is in It's in collaboration with the US Census, and you can look there for how the different graduate different majors lead to different kinds of professional programs across the UH system. So, we have a variety of different tools. I think the intent of this bill is to somehow centralize things even more into a single space. Though, this would be a lot of data to have in a

115single space. But, we already have consolidated quite a bit of it. A lot of the rest lives in different databases, and so as we come to refine our data infrastructure internally, we may be able to tap into that more, but right now our institutional research and program our policy office would have to be reaching into different kinds of data streams to build the kind of dashboard that is envisioned in this particular bill. So, is there something more simple that you can provide in the meantime? I know a lot of times, you know, we ask for so much data, and I'm not necessarily know that we actually utilize a lot of that data. A few people do, but the general public wants basic information. Like, okay, what what are the outcomes, and what are the possibilities

116of each program? Mhm. Um academic program. So, if I go into this program, you know, what can I expect? Something basic and simple across the board for each one to see how successful these programs are, or if the programs are are in in For me, what I look at whether or not it's current and in line with projections into the future as to what programs we're going to need. And, you know, so those are the things that I think the university should also be looking at is to seeing that are we are we prepping our students for programs or areas of academics that isn't going to be outdated in the next 10 to 20 years. And I think we have all of those pieces. I think that some of it is potentially for us promoting

117where you access that data already. And and again, the P piece I don't know how to pronounce it, the PSE database will show you one, five, and 10 years out for people who are getting sociology degrees or political science degrees or whatever kinds of degrees. So, we do have access to some of that data. Last legislative session, we also were able to get um through the process access to additional state level data that will allow us to refine some of that post graduate outcome data. And I think that gets to your point. Once we have access to that kind of data, then we can back cast and look at how academic programs prepare folks for whatever jobs Yeah, she says there's just too many different places to look, too many different right questions you got

118to ask, and you know, sometimes like what's you know, I know when I ask questions, I want can I get a chart of this? And then I get pages and pages of stuff. I'm like, okay, I want to just a simple Excel sheet that showed me well, how much we spent, how much we paid, how much money's left over, how much money we owe. No, I get a whole bunch of stuff. So, how do how do we get academics to give us basic stuff that the general public wants to see without all the other data that only the experts or people of that area in that kind of realm would would really want. >> Well, we did just implement for our institutional research office at the system level a new data data platform where hopefully

119you can see in a little bit more easy to access format a lot of the data around especially student success. We're slowly transitioning our old more complicated tables into the new environment, but it has infographics, it has charts, it tries to translate the data into something that's readable as opposed to simply trying to kill you with data. And so the new refreshed site does that for our basic student support, but we're trying to move move all of it over. I mean, it's it's a ongoing process. And then that site can house as we envision it, it would house the kind of work that this bill would potentially >> So, what is what is your hopes that we do with this bill? Um if if this bill were to pass, it would be useful for our

120institutional research office to have additional staffing support. They increasing federal compliance has meant that much of their time has been spent in the last few years submitting reports on financial value transparency and gainful employment, as well as the recent Acts legislation, which may or may not an injunction may be put on, which requires them to put together 7 years of data across the UH system uh for your institutions and compare that to admissions criteria at a granular level. So, there's a there's a lot of huge heavy lifts that the the team has been working on. But aside from that, um I think we can work towards this internally. Um and we already have a lot of the pieces in place, but there's as I said some internal data transitions happening. We're moving, as you know,

121to EAB, and that has a whole data warehouse infrastructure that we have it we're in the process of implementing. So, to be determined how all of that will come together. So, it may be a little premature to see if this bill is necessary. >> That's my biggest concern. We keep asking for data, and it keeps asking for more and more additional warm bodies to get that data. And then what do we do with that data? Just I think a small percentage of that data is actually utilized on a day-to-day basis. So, again, you know, what are the what are the pros and cons and the and the amount of money that we're spending to enable this kind of data and how many people are really utilizing the data and does the data really translate into

122results for like the one we talked about nutrition, you know, is the data going to going to then result in everybody eating you know, what percentage of the population is going to change their habits with that money over what period of time? Yeah. It's like all of this this climate change, you know, we're spending so much money on climate change and all the data that I've seen is that it's such a small percentage. All of this that we're spending such a small percentage in our role in saving the planet compared to what is going on to the rest of the world while people are going without electricity, water, and food in many places and and can't afford some of these things because the cost is going so high because of all the resources that we're

123putting into some of these data. And yes, it needs to be done, but still people need to be able to survive right on day-to-day. yeah, I mean, we can do anything with with more with more staffing and therein lies the whole issue with the bureaucrat bureaucracy that is there and the number of vice presidents and associate vice presidents and you know, and superintendents and assistant superintendents, deputy assistant, and area super you know, we we keep adding on layers and layers of of people and then I'm not sure that we really at the very bottom of the level of the general public and the students are actually benefiting by all of this. Well, we would hope to use this data to help support a student success agenda and that's certainly what a lot of the internal

124data dashboards that will be setting up in the next year will do. So, that we were just talking about this this morning in our officers group so that we'll be able to say, "Here are the kinds of gateway courses that don't contribute to student success so that we can intervene and and figure out how to make changes. So that's the ideal aspirational hope behind how we could use this data. >> those stuff some of those stuff you can tell without all of the data, right? I mean come on, you know, we we know >> And we do have access to DFW data now. I mean and we have implemented different kinds of professional development strategies based on that. So we are working with it already. For some reason legislators just feel like if we ask

125for the data if we get the data that things are going to change. Unfortunately, that's not happening but um Okay, yeah. Numbers any questions for me? Uh so Deborah, do you think that we can get the data without giving you this position? Um we have already I mean aside from our testimony talks to some of the data that isn't currently centralized and that would be more difficult. The rest of it we already have we're just needing to figure out how to consolidate that data. So If the thrust is towards student success especially then we do have access to most of that data already. So how much of the data do you not have? In In a So there's two levels to it. Things that we'd have to figure out how to collect so the data

126exists but it's out there in different databases or at different campuses. So a lot of that data is in it's one two third paragraph of our testimony. So for example, we don't have across all campuses the instructional cost per student credit hour and per degree awarded as as system wide. So campuses can have that. So some of it is collaborating and making it at a system level and other parts of it is the different databases we have making sure that we can tap into those and consolidate if that makes sense is two different kinds of challenges to where the data is right now. >> Okay. So So I'm going to rephrase my question. If your guys back was against the wall and this data was prevalent you just didn't have a position to compile and

127put it all together. Do you think you guys would be able to get all of the data together? If we had all the data in one place, yes. Okay, so It's really a matter of the the sort of reconfiguration of the system architecture and pulling in data from all of these different kinds of sources that And I'm not a I am not a data person. I rely on my data people to talk through kind of the intricacies of it. Uh but a lot of that is uh making our systems talk to each other and building up that infrastructure. So, since this does gear towards the student success, um I would believe it would be a priority of the university to ensure that we have accurate data, that we have full data. And so, I think

128it's a little unfair to come to the ledge and ask us to give you guys a position based on what should already be a priority for the university. And maybe having to um maybe shift some funds around to ensure this position. Uh so, Mhm. I'm almost kind of like I get super nervous asking you folks for another thing cuz then you ask us for 10 times more. So, I just wanted to see if your back was against the wall, if you would be able to compile all this data considering that it does prioritize student success, which already should be a vision and a mission for the university. So, that's all I wanted to mention. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Any other questions? No. Deborah, thank you. Okay, thank you, Deborah. Okay, moving on to House

129Bill 2338, House Draft 1. Uh this is uh Manoa Community College Promise Program to exclude grants, scholarships, and other funding sources from the calculation of the Hawaii Promise awards, allowing students to apply such funds towards indirect costs, including housing, food, and other living expenses to reduce financial barriers and support student success. We have um Kahele Dukelow on Zoom. Yes, uh Aloha uh Chair and um Senators. Um I'm Kahele Dukelow, the interim AVP for Academic Affairs for the Community Colleges and uh we stand on our testimony and we are available to answer questions. Great, thank you. Uh Keith Hayashi for Department of Education. Nobody from DOE. Okay. Uh David Meishiro testifying for Hawaii Kids Can. Aloha. Aloha. Uh Aloha Chair Kim, Senator DeCourcy, Senator Hashimoto. Um I just want to speak a little bit uh as

130the leader of a nonprofit, Hawaii Kids Can. So we've gone around the state, talked to many families, talked to a lot of students, and a couple things that we've learned. One is that folks are looking at community colleges very differently than I think traditionally has been done. There's been a lot more work to align community college with workforce needs, including construction, uh nursing, etc. And so the other thing that's come up very clearly is affordability. So families want to know that if they're making that investment in uh higher education, that they're going to get that return on investment. And I think fortunately UH Hilo's data has shown, especially when students are getting Associates of Science degrees from CUNY colleges, the return on investment is very strong. And just about as strong as it is from

131a general bachelor's degree from UH. Let that sink in. Associates of Science ROI is just about the same as a general bachelor's degree from UH. Um so all that to say, I think uh improving the Promise program is a really important uh step forward. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um let's see. Uh Carlin McFadden. Not here. Steven Schatz, Randy Wong, Chelsea Pain, and Crystal Thompson all in support. Anyone else here wishing to testify on this measure? If not, members, any questions? Questions? Senator Hashimoto, floor. EVP Luke Lu, are you still there? Yep, aloha. So so with this amendment to the bill, what what do you think is the is it's going to cost the state when we are you know, allowing more, you know, we're not going to count others aid, what what more

132is this going to cost us it to to subsidize? Well, at this point, we're not asking for any additional funding. I think we're we're trying to figure out exactly uh you know, what the effects may be. Um at this point, we know that through Hawaii Promise, we can we can meet the direct cost needs of students who show financial aid um through the FAFSA process. Um and we think that allowing students um to use other kinds of aid like scholarships um and institutional grants um for other costs, um we think that it would improve um the success of our students so that they would not have to work as much. And at this again, we're not asking for any additional funding at this point in time. Okay, so so basic cuz when when I read

133the bill, it's you're allowing more things to not count towards their >> Yeah. Yeah, right? Yes. >> So so that it shouldn't it shouldn't impact though what what are what we're going to be giving these students or does it? No. No. So, we, you know, uh we're asking that it's the last state and federal dollar so that we go off of what a Pell Grant would be issued, and then the Hawaii Promise funding would be used if there are any remaining need up until their direct cost is met. Right? So, we have a bunch of different kinds of funding that can be used to close those gaps, Hawaii Promise being one of them. Okay. Okay. So, so So, this would in theory, though, what would your cost savings be then in administrative burden? Um Let's

134see. Right now, what happens is that if a student is awarded, again, the base is going to be their federal Pell Grant, and a student is awarded Hawaii Promise. If a student goes out and gets any other kind of aid, right, through any kind of philanthropic, institutional, Hawaii Community Foundation, any kind of aid, we have to repackage their aid to exclude Hawaii Promise. What we're trying to say is that to let that federal state um aid stand with Hawaii Promise um so that students aren't penalized for going out and getting additional scholarships. But it seems like So, so nationally, though, isn't that aren't aren't they doing that for most institutions? They're penalizing if you get more scholarship, cuz I've talked to a lot of students and they're like, "Oh, no, since I get scholarship because

135they re- re- redo my financial aid package." So, is this is this like kind of a loophole? >> Yeah, and many of the Hawaii Promise, I mean, of the Promise programs across the nation are also trying to implement this in their state. And I think we had one of our consultants um testify at the last time that this is this is the practice I think um I don't I think it was an unintended consequence of saying last dollar. I don't think that was the intention of Hawaii Promise. But I think that that has been you know they have seen across the nation that had that has been the outcome and they're trying to remedy that um through you know clarifying that they're talking about last federal and state dollar and not all dollars. Okay. All

136right. Thank you, sir. >> I still I'm a little confused here. So if the Pell Grant's a federal program say do they they don't normally cover 100% right? Or do they cover 100%? >> And it depends on the student need how much money they would get for that. Yes. >> So say they they say they don't cover uh $500. Yeah. Or whatever it is 100%. So the Promise program comes in and can they then do that last $500? No. Yes. That's that's exactly how we use Hawaii Promise. So how were we doing it before? That's always been my thought that that's what we were doing. Well, what was happening is that if a student went out and got other scholarships it would displace Hawaii Promise instead of stack on top of um instead of stack

137on top to meet their indirect needs. So if a student you know got five you know their student need was $5,000 and they got 4,000 from a federal Pell Grant and they got a thousand from Hawaii Promise. If a student went out and got a scholarship of $500 that would we would repackage and uh the 500 would be taken out of Hawaii Promise. But isn't that what you know the Hawaii Promise was to put in whatever addition that needed. And so if they do get other scholarships, then they would reduce the state funding and allow for other students to get it. Right? So what are we saying here? We're saying you're going to get it no matter what and and No, we're saying that if you have any direct need that we can fill that

138with the federal financial aid and Hawaii Promise. And if you access grants or other private scholarships, that you use that to meet your indirect costs. Cuz the direct cost is just tuition and books, right? You still have housing, transportation and all >> that you should use it for tuition. A lot of scholarships, right, have requirements that should be used for tuition or that the check has to be paid directly to the school for the tuition. So how do we how does that fit in? I mean, there are some, but many scholarships, many uh private philanthropic dollars don't make those designation. What about those that do? Then what happens? Then you would have to displace. Okay. So then what the the direct or indirect um needs, the Promise program pays it 100%? No, no, no. It's

139built on first the federal aid. So the the student has to show financial aid need through the FAFSA process. And typically they would get a Pell Grant award. Depending on their need is the amount that they would get. And then whatever is left um to meet their direct cost, that's when the Promise comes in. Okay, but then we all you also say indirect, which mean which is transportation, food, housing. Yeah. >> Housing, right? So, those are you call it indirect or direct? Indirect. Indirect. Indirect. So, the Promise program can pay for all of that? >> Direct. Only direct. Oh, not indirect? No. So, the Promise and federal aid only So, each student has a direct cost of need and federal FAFSA, Pell Grants um can pay for direct costs. And the Promise is for direct

140costs only. Okay, I was under the impression that the Promise was for indirect costs. No. No? Mhm. Right? Huh. So, so I guess in the analysis then, we're we're we're still short then that there's no cost impact. I don't know how there is not one. I mean >> if you're if you're going to allow them to use outside scholarships for the indirect, you're in theory we're now subsidizing your direct costs more through Hawaii Promise, right? Yeah. But we don't know what that cost could be. We are anticipating that we if if there are no changes to federal financial aid and again, this is not all students, right? These are students that show financial aid need according to the federal guidelines. >> Right. Right. But we don't know what that number is. Cuz cuz I'm I'm

141assuming we we have a current set of students that you know would have to be recalculated, right? Based on this new law. So, I'm assuming that it's so small that it's you thinking it's insignificant or are we talking this impacts >> I mean so, Hawaii Promise is one kind of funding, right? We also have like, you know, we have stuff like native Hawaiian tuition waivers that also come out. So, it's not the only thing that we use to >> I exactly. Yeah. But we're just making sure, right? If But you guys We got We got We're going to pass something and then you're going to be like, "Oh, we got to go tip into the tuition, you know, surplus because we we forgot that, you know, forgot to do the calculation correctly, right?" Yes. Okay.

142So, we don't know. We don't think that there's going to be a negative impact. And we think that we can leverage all of the different um funding, federal and state funding to meet our need. Okay. To meet the needs of our students. So, currently, the Promise program is able to cover 100% of all the students that qualify uh for um Promise, you can cover 100% of direct costs. Or you've been covering 100% of direct costs. Pretty much, yes. What What do you mean by pretty much? Yes. Okay. So, >> of part of the problem is because of the way the law is written that it's the the funding keeps having to be repackaged, right? So, every time a student gets, you know, a new scholarship, it comes back into the calculation and then we have

143to repackage their financial aid, and then we, you know, have to fig you know, uh and then we move the funds on. So, that If that's part of the problem, I think, with the way that the bill is written, is that it's constantly repackaging based on any kind of additional aid that students get. Which causes, you know, problems when it when you're talking about timing of packaging and um you know, whether the student knows how much they're getting um Okay, so is it is it the intent that we do cover 100% of the students direct needs or should there be some buying by the students and that leave some money for other students to to be able to benefit from these state dollars? Um I think we try to cover as much of the direct

144cost as we can because we know that that's um what is that that's a that's an equalizer you know if we're looking for equity for economically disadvantaged students uh we know that at least covering the direct costs um will be the thing that could make or break their college success. um So you don't think a student should have to at least um have skin in the game as to paying for at least 5% or 10% of the direct cost so that I mean I know whenever I get something free you know lot of times people don't even bother cuz it's free but when they have to pay for a little bit then you actually utilize it because you know you know you put money into it and it means a lot more. Well I think

145that that we're assuming that they're able to pay the 5% right so I think we what we see is that um students cannot pay right up front. I know we have a lot of programs where if you if a student had to put out money up front they wouldn't be able to enroll. Well maybe it's not up front but it's somewhere. Mhm. Well I mean you know, covering direct costs is maybe tuition is tuition and books. Students still have to put in the time, they have to work. You know, they have all the rest of, you know, what it takes to live in Hawaii to as a challenge. I understand, but that's all all of us, right? All of us, I mean, we never None of us here ever had Promise Program or any kind

146of Promise Scholarship at all. And um you know, we all had to work to to pay for it. People are still working before they pay for their their debts and so forth and their student debt as well as other kinds of debt going on. So, um yeah, I'm just trying to see how we can help more students by giving, you know, everybody maybe 95% versus 100%, then we can cover more students with with dollars. And that's actually, I mean, financial aid packaging, you know, happens in that way so that um our and and community college financial aid is is done um systemically. So, you know, they do try to figure out the best ways to stack and leverage funding so that we can, you know, meet the needs of more students. That's that's You know,

147that's >> always lower tuition, right? I mean, that would help as well. Okay. Any Any other questions? Hearing none, thank you. Go ahead, Lois. Next bill. House Bill 2339, House Draft 1. We'll put at the end of the agenda now. I'm just kidding. I know Lois has been sitting here waiting. Okay, this is uh relating to the University of Hawaii revenue bonds, authorizing Board of Regents um to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of financing qualifying priority capital improvement projects. And we have Lois Salveron from the University of Hawaii to testify. Chair, Senators, Lois Salveron, University of Hawaii. We'll stand on our testimony. in support. We're happy to answer any questions. Well, come forth cuz you are the only one justifying. Anybody else wishing to testify just to be official? No? Okay, you are it.

148Okay, so what exactly you need, how much do you need, and why do you need it for the revenue bonds? So, this would be for the second half of the biennium. So, last year the legislature appropriated 30 million 750,000 in each year of the biennium for CIP expenditures in revenue bonds. Uh but, last year the legislature for the authorization, because in addition to the expenditure, we need the authorization to issue those bonds. Uh the legislature only issued the first year, which was the 30 million 750,000. So, the sec This would be for the second year authorization. So, we'll have a total of $61,500,000 in order to issue the revenue bond that was appropriated this biennium. And that revenue bond is for student housing. Correct. Not for anything else. It's just for student housing. Okay. Senator

149Hashimoto, that was your measure, right? So. Yeah. Anybody? Okay, thank you. Okay, next item Senate Bill I keep saying Senate Bill. House Bill 2461 House Draft 1. Uh this is the Maritime Youth Apprentice Pathway Program directing the University of Hawaii Community College in partnership with the state agencies and maritime workforce to conduct a study and develop a plan for statewide maritime youth apprentice program individuals 16 to 24. And here to testify we have let's see, Ardis Eschenberg for the University of Hawaii online on Zoom. Aloha mai kakahiaka, Chair Mercado Kim, Senators Dela Cruz and Hashimoto. Thank you for uh like testimony today. We stand on our testimony as sent in. Mahalo and sit by for questions as well. Okay, uh let's see. For the Chamber of Commerce, Sherry Manoa. We have Nadia in place of

150Sherry. Aloha chair, members of the committee. Um Nadia Holt here for Chamber of Commerce Hawaii standing on our written testimony in support. Mahalo. >> Okay, thank you. And we have 11 others all in support. Anyone else here wishing to testify? Not Okay, can we have artists back? Artists? Mhm. Okay. Um just a quick question. So what is the demand for this program? So there is a demand among employers who are often having to export or import workers. And we've just begun to develop with Kamehameha Schools Voyaging Association and Kailua High School a potential pathway from high school into college. We're also working with formerly Cal Maritime, now Caltech, which is our closest maritime institution on a transfer pathway from the associates into a bachelor's program for our students. Okay. Thank Members, any other questions? Um

151Artists, since you're here, um just to be clear, this is to fund a study, not the actual apprenticeship program? So it's largely for the study so we get the concrete data from employers as well as concrete pathways so that we provide the best training and multiple levels so that if there's a level that they can do in high school and then come out for a certain jobs with that versus the associates versus the bachelors. So it's that larger study and the data for that. And then um part of that will be piloting the initial program through Windward and Kealoha High School. How much of the funds is going towards the study? The bulk of the fund. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair. And they'll be left over in order to go ahead and, um, uh,

152implement? That is the hope that part of it would go towards the pilot itself. We'd like to do some short-term credentials with the students as we're doing it to build up their ability to, um, be labor ready. Like boating safety, those kinds of thing. Okay, thank you. Okay, that's the end of our agenda. I'm going to recess, um, go into decision-making. Calling the education committee back to order for decision-making. Starting off with House Bill 1605. This is the human, um, community and community resilience appropriate funds to the University of Hawaii Manoa Tropical Agriculture. Uh, the recommendation is to blank out the appropriations amount on page three. Uh, the date is already defective. We don't have to do that. And, um, I would like to see a little bit more, um, data on how these funds

153and funding actually, um, result in actual decreases in what we're trying to achieve. But, um, yes, we'll we'll blank out the amount and pass as an amendment. Uh, SD1. Uh, Chair votes aye. Members, HB 1605 HD1 chair's recommendations pass with amendment. Chair votes aye. Vice chair is excused. Senator Fukunaga is excused. Uh I vote aye. Senator DeCourt. >> Aye. Chair recommendations adopted. >> Thank you. And for Senate Bill I keep saying that. For House Bill 2171, uh this is engaging the University of Hawaii to engage in enterprise related activities for educational purposes. Recommendation is uh technical and non-substantive amendments for clarity and consistency. The date is already defective. Um and I hope that we will get a little bit more clean tightened language of this moving forward into Ways and Means and possibly to a

154conference. Any discussion? Hearing none, the chair votes aye. HB 2171 chair's recommendations pass with amendment. Chair votes aye. Any members voting with reservations? Any member voting no? With the excuse of Senator Fukunaga and Senator Kidani for this and all others. Chair recommendations adopted. >> Okay. House Bills 1873 House Draft 2. This is relating to the border regions. Uh this is a whole bunch of, you know, retreat exempt from retreat. Okay. Um recommendation is to change the or to include instead of being just one retreat a year, we will put one six-hour retreat per year. Um and the date is already defective. We don't have to change the defective date to another defective date, do we? In this case, you're already creating a SD. Yeah. Oh, okay. We weren't creating a SD rule. Okay. I see.

155Okay. So, again, recommendation that we add in a 6-hour exemption once a year instead of just an exemption once a year cuz that exemption could be a whole week. So, any discussion? Chair votes I. Members, HB 1873 HD2 Chair's recommendation is pass with amendment. Chair votes I. Any members voting with reservations? Any member voting no? No vote. No votes. Senator DeCoite? Chair, recommendations adopted. >> Thank you. Members, got to go back to House Bill 1605. The appropriation is already blanked out and so we are going to defect the date so it'll still be in SD1. So, defect the date to 7/31 2055. Okay. So, this what That was HB 1605. >> Yes, it's the first one. Um anyone wishing to change their vote? Or Chair's recommendation is pass with with amendments. No, I think it's

156the same. Anyone knows? Okay. Chair's recommendation is adopted. >> Okay, thank you. Okay, we are on House Bill 1952 authorizing issuance of geo bonds for improvements to the University of Hawaii Tropical Agriculture Human Resource for the Kauai Extension Station. Recommendation is as is cuz appropriation is already blanked out and we already have a defective date. So, so we need a effective date. So, in SD1 I'm moving it up. Again, the same effective date, July 31, 2055. Chair votes I. Members, HB 1952 HD1 Chair's recommendation is pass with amendment. Chair votes I. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? With all others voting I, recommendations adopted. Great, thank you. Senate House Bill 2050 2005 House Draft 2 establishes a statewide language access and education workforce development program. The Senate bill's already moving over. However,

157we go ahead and send this out to Ways and Means in case something happens, we will defect the date. Um any discussion? Defect the date is to July 31, 2055. Hearing none, chair votes aye. Members, as HB2005HD2, chair's recommendation is passed with amendment. Chair votes aye. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? With all others voting aye, recommendations adopted. Okay, House Bill 2139 and relating to fish species. This is for the Queen Island longhorn beetle. Recommendation is to amend through a defective date, 20 July 31, 2055. Chair votes aye. Members, as HB2139HD1, chair's recommendation is passed with amendment. Chair votes aye. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? With all others voting aye, recommendations adopted. Okay, 2158 House Bill relating to the University of Hawaii to maintain and publish standardized program

158level data for each academic program. Recommendation is technical and non-substantive amendments for clarity and consistency. Defect the date to July 1 July 31, 2055. Any discussion? Hearing none, chair votes aye. Members, as HB2158HD1, chair's recommendation is passed with amendment. Chair votes aye. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? With all others voting aye, recommendations adopted. House Bill 2338 House Draft 1 University of Hawaii Community College Promise Program. Recommendation, members, is to insert that the Promise Program will cover approximately 95% of the direct costs. Although therefore allowing for us state funding to be used to fund more students. It's for the Promise Program. There'll be buy-in and I think when people have to um put in money and make an investment in themselves that they will get um probably more more am I saying

159commitment? Any discussion on that item? Members hearing none, chair votes aye. Members HB 2338 HD1 chair's recommendation is passed with amendments. Chair votes aye. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? With all others voting aye, recommendations adopted. So, House Bill 2339 House Draft 1, this is relating to the revenue bonds for the University of Hawaii. Recommendation is to defect the date to July 31, 2055. Yeah, that's all the amendments. So, chair votes aye. Members HB 2339 HD1 chair's recommendation is passed with amendments. Chair votes aye. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? With all others voting aye, recommendations adopted. And finally, House Bill 2416, this is relating to a maritime youth apprentice pathway program. The recommendation is to tech for technical and non-substantive amendments for clarity and consistency. If we didn't

160blank out appropriation already, we will. And the effective date, July 31, 2055. No discussion, members. Chair votes aye. Members HB 2416 HD1 chair's recommendation is passed with amendments. Chair votes aye. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? With all others voting aye, recommendations adopted. Okay, thank you. We are in