001Welcome to the committee on education being held jointly with the committee on labor and technology. I apologize our agenda is at 2 1:00. So we're starting with the joint agenda first and then we'll proceed to the second agenda which is education only. Uh let's see. We are in room 229. Today is Friday, February 6. Yay for the weekend. Uh but in the unlikely event that we must end abruptly, uh this hearing due to technical difficulties, the committee will reconvene to discuss any outstanding business on Monday, February 9th, 1 p.m. in this conference room 229. And a public notice will be posted on the Hawaii State Legislaturator's website. Uh and this meeting is being streamed live on YouTube. In light of the time and the amount of measures that we want to cover before the committee,
002uh your testimony will be limited to one minute. We will be asking questions and so that discussion could go on beyond that. Uh there are let's see how many items we have four items on the joint agenda and then two others on the education only agenda. So with that I want to welcome our chair of the labor and technology committee, Senator Elephante. And um we want to start off with Senate Bill 3179. This bill relates to the safety of educational workers, requires the Department of Education uh and public charter schools to take certain steps to report incidents of harassment and implement procedures of handling harassments of educational workers. And I think we're all familiar with some of the harassments that's gone on in our schools. So this is really important measures. First person uh that
003we would like to call up would be the department of education. Chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Shantima, assistant superintendent for the office of campus operations and support testifying on behalf of the department of education. The department stands on its written testimony in support of this measure. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Uh let's see. the Attorney General's office. >> Good afternoon, Chairs Kim and Elephante, uh, Vice Chair Kedan, and members and Horuchi from the Department of the Attorney General. as we stated in our testimony um a couple of clarifying amendments um in a couple of sections is just to clarify that the bill um is addressing harassment that is directed at the educational worker because of the worker's position as an educational worker. Also, um, regarding the provision about the DOE
004assisting educational workers with legal actions, um, we're suggesting an amendment to make sure that that's limited to, um, actions to obtain temporary restraining orders. And then finally, our last note was that um, as written, the bill does not specify that the harassment was must come from a source outside of the DOE or charter school. Um so if this is the legislaturator's intent and you think that uh um the bill should be amended to make that clarification. >> Okay. Appreciate those those recommendations. >> See we have Osaturi for the HSTA. >> Thank you. Welcome to have you here. Uh Edn for the charter public charter schools. Aloha chair Marcato Kim and Ella Fonte and members of the committee PJ4 on behalf of Dr. No and uh the chart commission we stand on our submitted testimony in
005support of SB 3179. >> Thank you so much. >> Joy Bulisan testifying for HGA. Good afternoon. >> Thank you. >> Tuli Tafi for UPW. >> Tuli Tafi on behalf of UPW. I'm standing in strong support of this measure. >> Okay. Thank you. And then we have several others that have testified in support. Is there anyone here in this room that would like to testify that not have signed up? Anybody online? Nothing. Okay. With that, we're open for questions. Members, um, questions. Okay. I have a couple of questions. U maybe DOE. Uh, so the DOE has a policy for harassment already, [clears throat] right? >> Within for your employees. >> So, we're we're developing a standard practice right now and um it's in draft form and we're in consulting confer process. So our the units have
006been very responsive to us. So given the recent events, we're trying to expedite the process. So we'll have something formal coming out. Fortunately, with everything in the SP are components that we already have, but we want to package it into a a standard practice. >> Okay. And but that policy is only for within um DOE employees. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. So this bill then we want to target outside again to make it clear what the AG brought up that whether or not this is for overall or just to target non-DOE employees coming onto the >> correct. So the SP addresses harassment by by non-emp employees, >> right? Okay. So you folks are you folks are fine with that in there. Um okay. [clears throat] And then what about as far as the investigation? It
007does say conduct a formal investigation. So, we would we wouldn't do the same as a personnel investigation because it involves an outside party, but it would have the same components because we'd be asking for statements. Uh we'd be asking we'd be doing interviews and doing an analysis to come up with a determination. >> Okay. So, the intent is not to hire out a full-on investigation. >> No, >> we can do that in house. >> Okay. And then finally, the question on training. According to the bill, we say you may implement it uh into uh provided that the training may be included in the annual safety training provided by the department for all employees. So is it your intent to embedded? >> Um we're we're looking at that right now. I think we want to have
008everything packaged first and we want to be able to have the training ready to share with the employees on how to access it. Uh we're we're looking at considering including in the opening of the school year packet, but we would be reviewing it on an ad. >> Okay. So if we change the word to made to shall that way you embedded and not necessarily have to have teachers come to a whole separate another training class. >> Sorry, can you repeat that again? >> Yeah. Instead of you know because that the currently the bill says may be included which means you could do it another way. You could have another whole one hour separately and force teachers to or employees to come in and to do an extra training. And so in light of that, if
009it's embedded already is I think preferable, but I hate to come back a couple years now and people say, you know, we're spending so much time in all these trainings and stuff. So >> yeah, >> thank you for recognizing the amount of trainings that we have. Um, >> the training is good, but we also need them in the classroom. >> Yes, correct. >> Um, can we can we get back to you on that? >> Okay. What? >> Yes. >> Hi. Hi. Elizabeth Tigashi from the Department of Education. One of the things right now is we're evaluating existing trainings that our teachers are already going through that have deescalation techniques being in there that maybe perhaps are targeting EA security and special education teachers. So, we're evaluating a matrix of what is existing and then what
010are other opportunities for other um employees because we don't want to do a repetition and minimize the impact of the training. So, we're looking at what are different options that we can provide for employees. >> Well, good. Yeah. I We appreciate you doing that so it becomes more efficient and that's why we want to make sure that this training is embedded in what you folks are doing and not a whole separate other one. >> Correct. That's something that we definitely wanted to take into account the impact to our employees prioritizing instruction. >> Right. Because hopefully this is not something that's going to happen on a regular basis, but when it does happen, we want to make sure that people know how to address it and so forth. >> Yes. Right. Yes. >> Okay. Good. Um
011um who does the training? >> Who who does the training? You folks have people. >> So we have our safety office who's coming up with the training right now and we're going to be prepared to once once the standard practice is approved by the unions and we agree on something uh we're going to roll out the training from there. >> Okay. The training is for on and off campus. >> Just on campus. >> Yeah. >> So about training that happen I mean harassment or threats that happen off campus. It's not on school property, but near nearby on the way. >> So, we wouldn't extend our jurisdiction off campus unless it was at a school event that was at another site. [clears throat] >> Yeah. >> And then the police would have to get the police
012would be the one you would contact. >> Yes. >> Chair, do you have any question? >> Question. >> Sure. >> Yeah. just to um to go into the training because I just met with some HSTA members and they're saying that when you provide training or when you say they have to go through training um they're they have to take it out of their own pocket for training. So is this if you're requiring the training are you folks paying for it and you're giving them time off or how are you going to be doing this training when you say you're going to train everybody? I'm just um wanting to be sure that you're not putting another thing on teachers without giving them >> either time off or paying for the training. >> Correct. And that adds
013to Senator Kim's concern about the amount of training. So, this would be part of their workday. >> Yeah. It would be embedded in the whatever trainings they have already. >> Yeah. >> It would probably be at a a faculty meeting or opening of the school year for everybody. >> Okay. Any [clears throat] other questions, members? No. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. We'll move on to the next uh agenda item, Senate Bill 2872. This is relating to retired uh education employees. Requires uh rehiring of teachers for retirees for teachers or administrators in shortage areas or in difficult to fill positions to be paid the entry level salary for the teacher or administrator position as negotiated in the collective bargaining unit contract. Um we have first up on this is Department of Education. Once again, [clears
014throat] >> good afternoon, chairs, vice chairs, um members of the committees. Tammy Chun, Department of Education, Department of Education supports this bill. Um there's things that need to be worked out from a collective bargaining point of view. However, thank you. >> Thank you. Attorney General's Office. Good afternoon, chairs, vice chairs, and members of the committee. Jenny Nakamoto, deputy attorney general. We did submit comments on this bill, uh, specifically asking to include a perspective in P on pages three and four to add in after retiring teachers hired after June 30th, 2026. And we also asked to add in a section three um where the act wouldn't affect the duties matured already and ask >> can you expound on that? >> So section three we're seeking to include language that the act would not affect rights and
015duties that have matured already. So in other words you know whatever they've acred up until that time we wouldn't be affecting those people. only those teachers who come back to work under this who have been retired already moving forward after June 30th. >> Okay. Is there uh six the six month or the one year? >> I believe this one is the 12 month. >> Okay. Is the other bill that's the other bill is six months. >> Is that right? >> Um the other bill >> you probably don't know that. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I'm getting mixed up so many different bills. Okay. Osatui from HSDA. >> Thank you. Uh, Calbertt Young. >> Uh, good afternoon, chairs, members. Um, so the board of trustees for the employee retirement system has not reviewed
016or taken an official position on this bill, but administration has submitted testimony just offering comments. Um uh and those comments summarized are that there are a number of components already in the proposed bill. So as the as the bill continues to progress, it would be good for the legislature to keep uh focus on those um because they are related to the overall sustainability of the pension system itself. >> So what in particular uh is we should be focusing on? Um so this bill as you mentioned um with the last testifier this bill sets a 12 month element um break service versus the previous or the other bill which was 6 months. So our recommendation on the previous bill was that it should be 12 months because there is already in existing statutes this provision for
017other uh applications. It's 12 months and the 12 months is important because it uh the IRS code requires that there be a bonafide break in service um in order to not jeopardize the tax exempt status of uh the pension system. So that's why the recommendation is this this bill has 12 months. So keep an eye on you know that that's a good that is a good mark because it's already consistent in statute. >> The other thing is that um the way these positions get determined or classified of which positions are applicable for this uh return to work. um the way it is written it it's it's good because it's spelt out and it also involves um the human resources directors of all the employer jurisdictions. So in this case the the the DOE the state
018deerd that is important to again maintain consistency across the application for all positions within government employee in this case department of education. Okay, thank you. Eggno charter schools. [clears throat] >> Aloha, Chair Marcato Kim and Chair Elephante PJ4 on behalf of Dr. No. The commission stands on its submitted testimony in support of SB 2872 and is here to answer any questions. >> Thank you. Glenn Kagimita, is he here? Not here. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure that didn't sign off? Okay, members, we are open for questions. Any questions from anyone? >> Do we have a time limit on this measure? >> Okay. Yep. >> Did we do five years or was that the other bill? I'm getting mixed up. >> Okay, we can we can look at that. Other than that, I don't
019believe I have any questions. Members, you have any questions? I think this bill is is very important along with the next bill that we will take up because it certainly helps to fill the pipeline. uh we get teachers who've been teaching, have all the experience there. And so certainly it would be um advantageous if these people want to come back and help us at least temporarily uh while we we train our and get our licensed teachers on board. Okay, with that I'm going to switch over to our labor chair for the next two bills. >> Okay, thank you so much chair. Our next item on our agenda is Senate Bill 2391. This is relating to education pursuant to collective bargaining agree agreement negotiated for bargaining unit 5 and subject to the availability of funds provides
020annual step increases for public school teachers who have completed one year satisfactory service and comply with specific requirements. First up on our list is JN MUTO office of the collective bargaining chief negotiator in in opposition. Uh it is Mr. Must on Zoom? >> Not on Zoom. Chair. >> Okay. Thank you. From the Attorney General's office, Amanda Dolan or Jeffrey Kent. >> Aloha. Welcome. Well, good afternoon chairs. Um I'm Jeff Ken. I'm deputy attorney general. Um you basically we have a comments on this bill. Basically, while the intent on this is good, the it conflicts with the collective bargaining process and chapter 89. We did provide some language to allow for this if you did want to proceed with it. And then we also have some very tiny technical amendments. Don't really affect the subject at
021all. >> Okay. Thank you, Deputy Attorney General Kent. Uh we also have in person from the DOE, Superintendent Hayashi or Representative. >> Good afternoon. Tammy Chun, Deputy Superintendent. The Department of Education provides comments on this matter. We appreciate the um support in improving our ability to attract and retain teachers. The comments that we have are um there's details in the testimony, but I just wanted to summarize to say it that bargaining unit 5 includes more than people who are teachers. It includes counselors, librarians, and other job titles. So, we just wanted to clarify that. And the other is we would like for consideration for the step increase to extend to the other bargaining units um in the department of education as well. Um some of the other ones have also have shortages. And then finally,
022if this is passed, I'm requesting funding to provide to cover the cost. >> Okay. Thank you so much. >> We have Pakia Kalaka Bard. >> Okay. Thank you so much. Standing in support, Tuli Tafi from UPW. >> On behalf of UPW standing on our testimony, providing comment. Okay. Providing comments. Thank you, Grace Brown. Okay. And TFA is teach for America, right? Got it. >> Uh, Osatu, HSTA. >> Aloha. Welcome. Hello, chairs, committee members. Thank you so much for having us. I'm Osati, president of HSTA. Nice to see you all again. Uh with regards to testimony that said this violates collective bargaining so forth and so on. I would like to strongly point out the fact that our collective bargaining agreement says the parties recognize that annual incremental step movements are a viable recruiting and retention
023tool. So the parties are the employer plus us. So not just us. Teachers who are not at the top of the salary schedule and who have effective evaluation shall move to the next highest step of the corresponding class at the beginning of each school year. annual increment step in movements are subject to funding. So that is already bargained language. So to say that this violates collective bargaining is ridiculous. Uh I will also say that you folks asked for and we had a study conducted on salaries and the salary study basically said that you know in jurisdictions where they have annual salary uh step movement you know things are better. So we appreciate your consideration of this. Mahalo. >> Thank you Deborah Bon Upson. it. Are they on is this person on Zoom? Deborah, >> not
024on Zoom, chair. Okay. >> And then we have John Fitzpatrick on Zoom in support >> not present on Zoom chair. >> Okay. That completes our list of registered testifiers. I'll also note that there were 16 16 in support, two in opposition, and three comments. Uh any questions, members? Okay. If not, we'll move on to our last item on our agenda. is uh Senate Bill 3282. This is relating to the workforce PEL grant program. Establishes the statewide framework for the implementation of the federal workforce PEL grant program to provide financial aid for certain short-term workforce education and training programs. First up on our list from the Attorney General's Office, Candace Park or in person. >> Welcome. >> Thank you. Good morning, chairs, vice chairs, and members of the committees. Uh due the due to the involvement
025of University of Hawaii in this bill, we suggest indicating that it's a matter of statewide concern. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Deborah Halbert from University of Hawaii >> or Dborah? Is it Dborah? >> It's Deborah. My dad spelled it wrong on my birth certificate. >> I'm sorry. >> Um good morning or afternoon chairs, vice chairs, members of the committee. Deborah Halbert, vice president for academic strategy. Uh, the University of Hawaii stands on its testimony. Happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. >> Thank you, Deborah. Uh, we also have Sher Manure, president of the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii in support. >> Aloha, vice chairs, um, testifying on behalf of Chamber of Commerce. We stand on our testimony in support. >> Okay. In support. Thank you. That completes our list of registered
026testifiers. A total of that was three in support, zero in opposition, and three comments. Uh, anyone else that wishes to testify on Senate Bill 3282? If not, >> oh yes. Oh, sorry, director. I missed you. >> I had I had you down, but it didn't say. >> No, no, he had he was down. >> That's why. >> But he didn't have in person or Zoom. Well, go ahead, director. >> Good afternoon, uh, Chair Elephante, Chair Kim, Vice Chairs, uh, Lamosau, Kdan, and Kanani, and members of the committee. Uh I'm Jed Bai, director of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations. Uh we stand on our submitted written testimony offering comments. Uh you have our testimony. Um and I just want to add that uh besides uh talking with NASA or the National State Workforce Agencies
027and other states. uh we along with the uh uh DOE and workforce development council have been participating with the National Governor's Association uh session on implementing the workforce PEL grant uh you know make sure that we navigate the changes and you know we ensure a successful implementation so you have our continued commitment for uh that we will do what is necessary and proceed accordingly. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Director Boutai. >> Um, anyone else on Senate Bill 3282? >> Okay. Okay. If not, members questions. >> Yeah, Jane, can you come back up? Jake, who exactly is the point person at the administration that is bird dogging this to make sure that um we can comply with the new regulations? I've been to conferences on the mainland and this is a big concern um as
028to how the changes that are going to be occurring and that is the the jurisdiction according to the feds is rest with the governor's office. So yeah. >> Yes. So it's been WDC who's been coordinating the meeting. Uh you know they've been [clears throat] >> who has been >> WDC workforce development council. >> Okay. And the person there >> uh Bennett u Mr. Lucha [clears throat] >> and where do you where do you see the timeline on this from the >> well we're waiting for the you know the guidance from DOE they're creating the rules and you know they're working with the do they're providing the technical and the support I mean they've been saying soon but you know what >> when you say DOE you're talking about >> USDE >> the USDA >> yeah
029US department of education >> right yeah I was told the early summer maybe. >> Well, it's I think it should be sooner because by July 1st it's supposed to, you know, this is supposed to >> supposed to be right. Yeah. So, summer so doesn't give us a whole lot of time. >> Will this affect um all the all the programs or just the workforce portion? >> Just the workforce portion. I mean I know when the you know on the one big beautiful bill they tried to put all the you know the the Wagner Fiser um into you know into one they call it make America skilled again. So I mean the way the this administration I mean they've not just delayed the distribution and funding but they've also you know shifted some policies. >> Okay.
030So, do you feel that this bill can proceed prior to them? >> I don't think you would need a statute to do what we're doing now. I think we, you know, you just because plus, I mean, there's still some, you know, I think there's still a lot of uncertainty until we, you know, until we get the the rule, I don't think we should, you know, finalize. Okay. >> So, are you saying that you have the adequate staffing and funding to go ahead with this? >> I mean, depending on which entity is going to be doing the, you know, like in terms of the grant making, I mean, I know we we've already I mean, uh, you know, our own workforce development division, they, you know, they they they have the expertise on, you know, u
031getting, uh, processing federal grants. So they understand the compliance requirements, the audits. >> So have you guys discussed it as to whether or not there are appropriate staffing and funding to proceed? >> I think you know like I said this is a I don't think we we should overhaul the you know the system because until we know what's what's coming down I mean we shouldn't overhaul the system but I think we should be meeting and making sure that you we're prepared. Um, director Bhutai under rulemaking authority. So you me so in the bill it has the workforce development council. Do you think that's the appropriate entity or should it be DL DLR in general? >> I mean the way that uh the WDC is designed it's an advisory. It's not a >> so they don't
032do rulem now. >> No the rule making when you're talking about is the USDOE they will be the one that's okay. >> Yeah. They're not doing the rule making. But we have you may adopt chapter 91 as necessary. >> Yeah, they can do rule making if you guys want them to you know because at the end of the day >> they can do that now though [clears throat] is the question. >> If that's the policy they can they can do the rule making. >> Okay. Or would you prefer that to be under DIR because DI can do rulem itself? >> Yeah. Yeah, we do. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Oh yeah. Senator director um as I look at the workforce development council it is advisory from the governor's office or is the governor and that
033I look at the members of of um this group for the Pell Grant and it's a PEL grant program it looks like it goes across the board with various organizations including um the university and DOE um and so it it seems to be a purview of of all of the various agencies in order to to really execute on on projects. So I'm just wondering whether this workforce development council as I understand it does have members from across the board. So um you know in terms of of this is this bill it seems to allow for that and be able to be u much more expansive in terms of programming. So um I'm not sure whether within department of labor and the workforce development division that it it really does provide that kind of um extensive
034review by various agency across the state. So um what how would it be different if it were under WDD instead of WDC workforce development division in labor department versus workforce development council across the board from you know the university to the department of education to other organizations the private sector as well. Well, I was just talking about, you know, the consult consultation, you know, can be done by the WDC, but in terms of the administering, I think is that's what I'm trying to point out that it >> because you you got to have uh, you know, I mean, the the the Pell Grant, I mean, it's not a I don't think you learn it overnight on how to administer because you could jeopardize, you know, you could get audit [clears throat] findings or even lose
035federal funds if you're if you're not in compliance. It very might very well might be that funding can go to various agencies not necessarily um through department of labor. So it can be a collaborative among members of the workforce development council could it not? >> Yeah absolutely. >> Thank you. Thank you chair question. Would you be okay, director, if we put the rulemaking authority under DLIR? >> Okay. Thank you. Members, any further questions? Okay. If not, do you want to recess or roll into >> DM? >> Yeah, I'm ready. Okay. Um, we're going to go into decision-m. >> Okay. Members, going back to uh Senate Bill 3179. This is relating to the safety of educational workers. Um the fact that DOE is working on a policy for their harassment within the employees of the DOE
036uh the recommendations would be that this measure would apply to uh anyone non-DOE uh outside of the DOE family. Also a recommendation is to amend on page five the word may be embedded into training on the training issue shall be uh and that we on the question with the attorney general the TR that any legal actions support would be with the TTRO process only and um there were a couple other uh attorney general amendments that also would like to adopt adding the words because of the educational workers position as education. Um yes, was there anything else? I think that carries on any other technical amendments that may be necessary. Any questions, members? Any discussion? Hearing none. Um the recommendation then would be to amend to an SD1 for the vote. Senator Kadani, chair votes I
037>> for Senate Bill 3179. >> Correct. >> To pass with amendments. >> Chair votes I. Vice chair votes I. Senator Fukunada. >> Excused. >> Senator Hashimoto. >> Hi. >> Senator Court. >> I was adopted. Madam Chair, >> thank you. >> For the Okay. >> For the committee on labor and technology, same recommendation as edu to pass with amendments. Uh any discussion? If not, vice chair lamas for the vote. Chair votes I. >> Members voting on SB 3179. Recommendation of the chair is to pass with amendments. Um chair votes I. Vice chair also votes I. Senator Ihara excuse. Senator Mory [laughter] >> I senator Favlla is also excused. Chair recommendation is adopted. >> Thank you. >> Okay. And the next the next bill is Senate Bill 2872. This is relating to the retired education employees. Um,
038this members, this actually this bill amends the current education law. And what I would like to recommend is we delete the words that it only applies to only hard to fill um >> and and shooter addresses the shoot um such a shortage. I think this should this should apply to everybody. It should apply to all of the schools. um yeah, charter schools and whether they're hard to fill or not, which then addresses some of the issues I think in the pilot pilot project. That is a bill we're going to hear later. So, um see, so removing that and yeah, I think that clarifies that. Did I miss anything? uh and any AG recommendations that we can go over and any technical amendments if there needs be. So with that any discussion members hearing none chair
039um chair votes eye on Senate Bill 3179 with amendments. >> Oops. >> Is this 2872 >> 2872 that was >> Senate Bill 2872 with amendments. Chair >> I vice chair votes I senator excused. Excused. Senator Hashimoto. >> Hi. >> Senator Dort. >> Hi. >> Measures adopted. Madam chair. >> Thank you. >> For the committee on labor and technology. Same recommendation on Senate Bill 2872 to pass with amendments. Any further discussion? If not, um vice chair lau for the vote. Chair votes I. >> Members voting on 2872. Recommendation of the chair is to pass with amendments. Now noting all um members present from um labor committee and technology. Um, anyone voting with reservations or no? Hearing none, chair, recommendation is adopted. >> Thank you so much. Our next item on agenda is Senate Bill 2398. This
040is relating to education. Chair is going to recommend that we pass with amendments. We're going to adopt the AG's proposed amendments and their testimony. We're also going to change the effective date to January 1st, 2077. Any further discussion? >> What bill number is that? >> We are on 2391. >> 91. >> Yes. Any discussion, members? Okay. If not, Vice Chair Lamasaw for the vote. Chair votes I. >> Sorry. Um, all right. Members voting on 239 SP 2391. Recommendation of the chair is to pass with amendments. Um, noting all members present. Anyone voting with reservations or no? Hearing none. All members vote I. Chair. Recommendation is adopted. Same recommendations for committee on education pass with amendments for Senate bill 20 2391. Chair votes I vice chair votes I. Senator Fukunaga >> excuse senator Hashimoto. >> Hi.
041>> Senator Picort. >> Hi. >> Measures adopted. Madam chair. Thank you. >> And then our last item on our agenda is Senate Bill 3282. This is relating to workforce PEL grant program. Uh chair is going to recommend that we pass with amendments. We're going to adopt the AG's amendment in their testim in their testimony to include a statement that quote this bill is a is a law of statewide concern. End quote. And then we're also going to adopt the Office of Information Practices OIP amendment in their testimony under subsection D. Information produced pursuant to this section and designated as confidential shall be protected from public disclosure to the extent authorized by chapter 92F. We're also going to do technical amendments and then also hearing from the testimony from DLIR director on page 12 starting with
042line three. The rulemaking authority will be to the department the department of labor and industrial relations. Uh and then we're also going to change the effective date to January 1st 2077. And if I didn't say that previously we're also going to make tech amendments. Okay. Any further discussion members? [snorts] Okay. If not for committee labor and technology vice chair lisaw for the vote. Chair votes I >> voting on SB 3282. Recommendation of the chair is to pass with amendments. Noting all members present. Anyone voting with reservations or no? Hearing none. Um all members vote I chair. Your recommendation is adopted. >> Same recommendation for Senate Bill 3282 for committee on education. Uh pass with amendments. Chair votes I. Vice votes I. Senator Fukin excused. Senator Hashimoto. Hi. >> Senator Decoy. Hi. Measures adopted. Madam chair.
043Hang on. >> Um, if we can go back to >> I'm sorry, members. Um, >> the decision on 2391 >> to reconsider our previous decision on Senate Bill 2391 relating to education. I know we just voted on that, but um, Chair Kim also wants to >> We had an amendment that I'm sorry if I slipped my mind. um to include charter schools uh into the steps as well. I mean they're also teachers and they should be included and that was a amendment that um somehow got overlooked in in the whole process. So if we can go and amend that to also include uh that amendment members, is there any objections to including that amendment? So do we need to take a revote on? >> It probably should. >> In abundance of caution, we'll take a
044revote. Go ahead. >> We have vote sheets, extra vote sheets. Okay, >> it's okay. I can do it. >> This is Senate Bill 2391. [laughter] >> Well, we have to hold on. We have to vote. She The vote she does say amend with amendment. So, I don't think we need to actually retake the vote, but we can verbally. There are no objections to the to the vote that was taken earlier to include >> include the charges. Okay. >> So So technically um since everyone voted for it, someone in the majority can move to basically in effect move to reconsider and then now and no objection to that. So now we're voting on the bill. >> So you can just use one sheet, >> right? Okay. >> So why don't we just do that technically >>
045orally here? Is that okay? >> I'll defer to >> our our veterans in the room. >> It's technically [laughter] okay. >> U so members, what we're going to do is we're going to reconsider the committee's previous action on Senate Bill 2391 relating to education. And that was uh we're going to report it out with amendments. Um the amendments that were stated was we're going to adopt AG's proposed amendments in their testimony and change the effective date to January 1st, 2020 uh 2077. We're going to reconsider that. So is there a second to reconsider? >> Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Any objection to the reconsideration? Okay. If not, hey members, now we're back to the previous bill. So we're going to include the charter school in this amendment. So, we're going to pass with amendments,
046adopt AG's proposed amendments in their testimony, and then also include charter schools as part of this bill. Any further discussion on that? >> Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh with that, um being that no further discussion, Vice Chair Lamasau, uh we have to take a vote >> if we have to take a vote again. >> Yeah. Uh I don't have to, but >> yeah, we'll just take just do it. Okay. Okay. Members voting on SP 2391 recommendation of the chairs to pass with amendments. Noting all members present. Anyone voting with reservations or no? Hearing none. Chair, all members vote I. Your recommendation is adopted. >> Okay. And same action for the committee on education for the Senate that we are amending uh this bill to include the charter schools as well as the
047other amendments mentioned. Uh and so with that, chair vai. Members, if there's no objections to the amendments. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> We're adjourned. >> Okay. Hold on. Hold on. Chair. I just wanted to make my note. I know I wasn't here. Oh, my support for the relating to safety education workers uh bill >> 3179. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyway, >> appreciate it. >> We appreciate that. Thank you. We are adjourned. Okay. Okay, we'd like to call to order the committee on education for the Senate on our second agenda item. It is 1:44 p.m. We are still in room 229 and it is still Friday, February 6. Uh first item on the agenda is Senate Bill 2836. Uh we did pass out the first measure uh earlier in this
048meeting. Uh if anyone wants to come and still testify um you can do so. I believe the author of this measure is satisfied with the bill that we passed. So um we could easily defer the measure. >> Yeah. >> So anyone wishing to testify make it simple instead of calling through the names. Okay. Okay. That takes us to the next item on the agenda. The last item on the agenda. Um, Senate Bill 2181 increases the public school instructional hours beginning in 2027 to 2028 school year. Um, first to testify. Let's see. Apologize. There it is. Okay. Attorney General's office. I'm sorry. That was the fir that was 2836. 2021. Uh Kayashi de and everybody looked like what the attorney general what [laughter] >> 2181. What did I say? She said 21. >> Okay. Please go
049ahead. Thank you. >> We're all kind of Friday. >> It's okay. It's Friday. I'm on the same page. So, um, Chair Marcato Kim, Vice Chair Kedani, and Senate committee members. I'm Elizabeth Tidash from the Department of Education. We stand on our written testimony. Thank you. >> And that is in in opposition. >> We provide comments and the only concern we have is in regards to collective bargaining with regarding to the minutes. >> Okay. Thank you. See USA in opposition. Chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Yes. Um, as mentioned, there are collective bargaining implications of this where bill basically says for students to go from a 6-hour day to a 6 hour 45 40m minute day uh every single day. So, of course, the 40 minutes needs to be bargained. Thank you. >> Why don't
050you stay there because I don't believe is there anyone else um no one else signed up to to testify in person. So, anyone else here wishing to testify at this? Yes. Come on up. Are you wearing the same shirt? So, yes. [laughter] >> Aloha. I'm Tiffany Edwards Hunt. I'm am a student activities coordinator at Ka Middle School. I I just would like to um express my opposition to this. Um I get the idea of having our students learn longer. I just know as a teacher and a parent how mentally exhausted they are after our existing day. I also know that I'm still trying to argue for hazard pay and higher pay and then to be sitting in this meeting to be told let's um increase your hours. It just feels wrong. Um and I also
051would like you to consider the fact that many of our students are in sports and they need a little downtime. They need a little afternoon snack time because my children do not get home until 6:30 or 7:00 and we live 15 minutes from our school. I live in a very ideal environment considering some of my colleagues and other parents. We have children that don't get home until 7:00, 8:00, 9:00 at night depending on their extracurricular activities. And for me, who is a big proponent of social and emotional learning, all of those things are very important, particularly in our rural areas. We need to keep our children busy. That's how they stay healthy. So, I would like for you to just take a holistic perspective here. Do us right with the hazard pay, increase our pay,
052and then let's talk about in increasing the instructional hours. Thank you so much, and aloha. >> Thank you. Very well said. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? If not, members, we're open to questions. Senator Dort, did you have your hands up? >> Yes, thank you. Um, I'll say, thank you so much for being here. I I do share the same concerns as you do as far as uh the time period of our kids staying a little longer, teachers having to put in a little bit more. So, um, yeah, I guess it's just a comment, so I just wanted to share that. Have you received um some feedback from other teachers about this? >> Well, we're just not sure. So, this asks to extend the students um day by 40 minutes basically. >> The
053currently what it is now is 180 hours per year and those hours are bill. So, if they're having breakfast, lunch, recess, all of that is included in that. So, I mean, if you're going to add 40 minutes and have more recess because they honestly the kids have been like, "We're going to learn how to take a test all day long, right?" And so sometimes more downtime, we've we've kind of reduced the amount of recess some of these kids have had. So if we're going to increase those types of things that allow them to break down, but again, this is all something that we need to collectively bargain as well. But if you're going to just say it's 40 more instructional minutes, that's problematic because teachers are already burnt out, right? And then like people don't
054want to come into the profession. So let's make it worse. >> Just uh one followup, chair, uh thank you for mentioning that because uh schools have different bell schedules. So as example Nanokuli High School uh we only have one recess um and so uh when the school had made the transition uh teachers were losing their voice [laughter] so it took some getting used to but uh I do believe in uh your um your stand with uh it's going to pretty much burn out a lot of teachers and maybe overload the students. And actually, um, Senator, we saw on your side when a race to the top happened and we increased the school day by 1 hour in your side, the kids were not paying attention. They were like dead by the end of the day
055and like >> do we want to go back to that? >> No, thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, chair. >> Absolutely. >> U please note that um, you know, no one at this table introduced this measure. So just >> we're aware. We're definitely aware >> but you know we are equal opportunity committee and we try to hear all the members bills and take that into consideration but um yeah thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your time. >> Anybody else wanting to testify or any other questions members hearing none I'm going to re go into decision making and measure is to defer this is Senate Bill 2836. Uh this is We've already passed the bill, the first bill which is more encompassing and takes into consideration the pilot project which we
056I should be pilot should be um a permanent hopefully permanent position. The we can have our retirees come back and assist us. Uh as for Senate Bill 2181, uh the recommendation also is to defer this measure indefinitely. Any discussion? Hearing none. Uh we are we are journ make up for all the