STATE OF HAWAII
BOARD OF EDUCATION
FINANCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE

MINUTES

Queen Liliuokalani Building
1390 Miller Street, Room 404
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Thursday, February 20, 2020


PRESENT:
Kenneth Uemura, Committee Chairperson
Bruce Voss, Esq., Committee Vice Chairperson
Margaret Cox
Brian De Lima, Esq.
Nolan Kawano
Kili Namauʻu
Catherine Payne
Dwight Takeno

EXCUSED:
None

ALSO PRESENT:
Christina Kishimoto, Superintendent
Brian Hallett, Interim Assistant Superintendent and Chief Financial Officer, Office of Fiscal Services
Randall Tanaka, Assistant Superintendent, Office of School Facilities and Support Services
Roy Ikeda, Planner, Planning Section, Office of School Facilities and Support Services
Alison Kunishige, Executive Director
Kenyon Tam, Board Analyst
Regina Pascua, Executive Secretary
Irina Dana, Secretary


I. Call to Order

The Finance and Infrastructure Committee (“Committee”) was called to order by Committee Chairperson Kenneth Uemura at 10:32 a.m.


II. *Public testimony on Finance and Infrastructure Committee (“Committee”) agenda items

Committee Chairperson Uemura called for public testimony. There was no public testimony at this time.


III. Approval of Meeting Minutes of January 16, 2020

ACTION: Motion to approve the Finance and Infrastructure Committee Meeting minutes of January 16, 2020 (Payne/Cox). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.
IV. Discussion Items Committee Chairperson Uemura asked Committee members to refer to their materials regarding the Department of Education’s (“Department”) fiscal reports as of December 31, 2019.

Committee Chairperson Uemura reminded Committee members that the Committee previously determined that the Department should present on fiscal reports semi-annually rather than quarterly. He stated that this report is the mid-year report. He noted that the Committee previously requested that the Department report on any issues that arise that could have a material effect on finances compared to the previous year as soon as possible during the interim period.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked if Committee members had any questions or comments regarding the Department’s comparison to budget, school food services, student transportation, or utilities reports. The Committee did not have any questions or comments regarding the aforementioned reports.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked if Committee members had any questions or comments regarding the Department’s federal impact aid receipts.

Committee Member Brian De Lima noted that the Committee and Department had past discussions regarding federal impact aid receipt collection efforts and asked about the status of these efforts. Brian Hallett, Interim Assistant Superintendent and Chief Financial Officer, Office of Fiscal Services, stated that the Department is engaged in ongoing discussions with military communities. He highlighted that the Department is in the process of testing a pilot that provides opportunities for electronic submission of surveys. He noted that one of the challenges is that surveys must be taken on a single day during a single point in time.

Committee Member De Lima asked about the Department’s pilot. Hallett explained that the pilot is a joint effort between the military and various Department offices, including the Office of Information Technology Services; the Office of Strategy, Innovation, and Performance; and the Office of Fiscal Services.

Committee Member De Lima asked about recent payments in the current fiscal year. Hallett explained that the Department received an initial payment in February of $31 million, which is the largest payment the Department anticipates receiving. Committee Member De Lima asked if the Department has received payments for the 2018-2019 fiscal year. Hallett confirmed that the Department has received these payments. Committee Member De Lima noted that the Department did not indicate the $31 million payment in its fiscal reports. Hallett explained that the Department included a note in its memorandum in Committee members’ meeting materials. He stated that the Department is anticipating that federal impact aid collections will lag behind historic collection levels, which have averaged $40 million per year.

Committee Member De Lima referenced the Department’s school impact fees report. He stated that the Department noted in its report that balances and activities for fair share and impact fees are indicated. Hallett explained that balances and activities are in relation to projects.

Committee Member De Lima referenced the Department’s federal impact aid receipts report. He noted that the Department collected $55 million during the 2018-2019 fiscal year and asked about the Department’s spending of these funds. Hallett stated that the Department spent approximately $40 million of these funds. Committee Member De Lima asked if the Department carried over $15 million to the 2019-2020 fiscal year. Hallett confirmed that this is correct. Committee Member De Lima commented that the Department received $34 million in federal impact aid receipts. Hallett clarified that the Department received $34 million in January and February of the current fiscal year. Committee Member De Lima commented if the Department budgeted to receive $40 million. Hallett stated that the Department aggressively budgeted for $45 million. Committee Member De Lima asked if the Department anticipates receiving payments for prior fiscal years. Hallett stated that the Department might receive at least one additional payment for prior years but does not anticipate the payment to be more than a few million. He explained that payments are subject to national timing and processing. He highlighted that the Department attends conferences several times per year regarding federal impact aid receipts. He stated that the Department could update the Committee after attending its next conference in March.

Committee Member De Lima asked if the Department expended federal impact aid funds it received during the 2017-2018 and 2016-2017 fiscal years. Hallett confirmed that the Department expended these funds. Committee Member De Lima asked about carryover funds from those years. Hallett explained that the Department uses collections from this year for the following fiscal year’s budget needs. The Department attempts to carryover $40 to $45 million each fiscal year to balance its budget. Committee Member De Lima asked if the Department expended the $55 million it received for the 2018-2019 fiscal year during the 2019-2020 fiscal year. Hallett confirmed that this is correct and the Department is currently expending the $55 million it received for the prior fiscal year. Committee Member De Lima asked if the Department anticipates carryover. Hallett explained that the Department anticipates that it would use the funds it received this year in the next year. He noted that the Department encumbers and reserves these funds in a sense rather than expends. Committee Member De Lima stated that the Department should revisit and review how it uses its federal impact aid resources.

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that he would like the Department to include additional impact fee information in future fiscal reports, such as the origins of impact fees and the purpose for which the funds can be used. He noted that impact fees and fair share funds might have different uses. He stated that the Department previously reported on this information but did not include these details in its current reports. Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that it would be informative for the Committee to review impact fee and fair share funds that might be available for capital improvement program (“CIP”) and repair and maintenance (“R&M”) projects. He noted that $16 million is available but the Department might be mandated to use funds for particular areas and impact zones. He stated that it would be helpful for the Committee to review the origin and forecast of future fees by project. It would also be helpful for the Committee to review expected revenues and available funds for CIP and R&M projects. He stated that the Department should be able to forecast impact fee revenue for particular projects. Committee Chairperson Uemura requested that the Department include these details and information in future reports. He stated that the Department should be prepared to answer how it plans to address its R&M commitments with these funds in future meetings.

Committee Vice Chairperson Bruce Voss commented that the Department reported zero fair share and impact fee expenditures for the past three quarters. He recalled that the Department previously shared that statute requires the Department to develop an expenditure plan for impact fees and fair share funds. He noted that the Department stated that it was in the process of a developing a plan in past meetings and asked about the status of the expenditure plan. Hallett stated that the Department would need to look for its expenditure plan to provide information to the Committee. Randall Tanaka, Assistant Superintendent, Office of School Facilities and Support Services, stated that he has assigned Roy Ikeda, Planner, Planning Section, Office of School Facilities and Support Services, to review impact fees, statute, and projects for which funds can and cannot be used. He stated that the Department would be able to provide the Committee with a report. Tanaka stated that he also assigned Act 155 to Ikeda and Ikeda is currently conducting assessments of the Department’s real estate and school locations. He stated that the Department contracted with Colliers International to receive assistance with assessment. The Department will be able to generate reports regarding available funds and project for which funds cannot be used. Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that he would also like the Department to review whether the Department could use these funds toward R&M projects and whether the Department could use funds to help fund maintenance.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss referenced the Department’s CIP report. He stated that he is disappointed in the recent R&M data. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss noted that there has been some increase in project design activities but values and completion numbers declined substantially in the most recent quarter. He asked for an explanation regarding declines. Tanaka stated that he is unsure why numbers are declining and does not yet know why there are lags. He highlighted that the Department is convening weekly meetings to assess the status of projects, ways in which to move forward, and whether there is anticipation of lapses. He stated that the Department generates a report to assist in monitoring and oversight.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss emphasized the importance of the Department implementing next steps to move forward and further emphasized the importance of the correct number of staff and an action plan. He asked about the Department’s plan to increase the number of projects under construction activity and completion in the upcoming quarter. Tanaka stated that the Department is using tools, including tracking, as a starting point. He noted that are several factors contributing to the lag, including the Department’s capacity and release of funds from the Department of Budget and Finance (“B&F”) and the Governor. He highlighted that the Department recently met with Neil Miyahara, Administrator, Budget, Program Planning, and Management Division, B&F; Craig Hirai, Director of Finance, B&F; and Linda Takayama, Chief of Staff, Office of the Governor, and is working with consultants and contractors. Tanaka stated that the Department is taking steps to ensure it moves forward and accelerates the pace at which it moves forward.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented on the Department’s CIP report and stated that he expects the Department to provide more information in the future. He referenced the R&M backlog and stated that he would like additional information so Committee members have a better perspective of the backlog, including the number and dollar amount of projects that the Department deemed no longer necessary and voided; the number and dollar amount of projects that had commenced design but were put on hold due to a lack of funds; the procedures for starting design work without the commitment of funds; and explanations as to why the Department would start design work without a commitment of funds.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked if the R&M backlog includes project design activity. Tanaka confirmed that the backlog includes a combination of activity. Committee Chairperson Uemura commented that the Department would need to combine these figures, which would increase the backlog to over $1 billion. He stated that he believes the R&M backlog includes project design until the project moves to the construction phase and noted that he would like this information to be included in a footnote if this is the case. He stated that the Department would need to provide clarification in future reports.

Committee Member Nolan Kawano asked the Department to clarify its graphs and tables in its meeting materials. He commented that the Department’s graphs show a $1.1 billion figure while its tables show a $951 million figure and asked the Department to reconcile its data. Committee Chairperson Uemura agreed that the Department would need to clarify and reconcile its data in future reports. Tanaka stated that he believes $951 million is the correct figure. Christina Kishimoto, Superintendent, confirmed that the Department would clarify and reconcile this information in future reports.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss agreed with Committee Member Kawano. He stated that the Department’s tables throughout its CIP report present some figures but do not include other figures. He stated that the Department should review the information it includes in future reports so that there are no misunderstandings.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented on information regarding project design activity. He asked the Department to allocate values to CIP and R&M in design. He stated that it is easier to determine if numbers are included versus graph coloring. Committee Chairperson Uemura asked if it is possible to include the gross number and dollar change in CIP in design and R&M in design. He detailed a visual for tracking progress since the net change does not reflect additions and reductions.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented on project construction activity. He asked how the Department tracks the number of projects exiting the CIP and R&M design phase to project construction activity. Committee Chairperson Uemura asked if it was possible for the Department to reconcile the movement and include it in future reports. Tanaka confirmed that the Department could include this information moving forward and agreed that it is a necessary measurement.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented on project completion data. He asked how the Department determines the completion or success rate for each line item. He asked which factors the Committee should be reviewing, such as projects in the R&M backlog, projects moved to design phase, projects moved to construction, and projects completed.

Tanaka stated that the Department is reviewing national standards for how data should be reported so that the Department has a common baseline. He noted that the Department is reviewing California’s model and is planning to overlay this model with common practices in Hawaii. The Department is having discussions with B&F and the Department of Accounting and General Services regarding tracking to use as another benchmarking tool. He stated that this process should be completed within the next two weeks for the Superintendent to review. Committee Chairperson Uemura asked if the Department is trying to ensure that it computes in the same manner in which the California model computes. Tanaka explained that the Department is trying to find common standards and detailed first drafts and the importance of baselines. Committee Chairperson Uemura asked if data might change during the transition period. Tanaka confirmed that data could change.

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that the Department used to include appropriation activity charts and data in its fiscal reports but did not include this information in its current fiscal report. He asked about lapsed funds and stated that as of the 2018 fiscal year, there were $21,380,412 of CIP funds that lapsed. Committee Chairperson Uemura asked about the status of these funds. He asked if the Department included these funds in appropriated balances or if the Department returned these funds to the State. He stated that the Department would need to review why these funds lapsed and determine whether it could get these funds back. Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that he would like the Department to include this information in future fiscal reports.

Committee Member De Lima asked about lapsed funds. Committee Chairperson Uemura explained that funds lapse if the Department does not spend funds and needs to return funds. Committee Member De Lima stated that he would like more information regarding why funds lapsed.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss asked about release of funds. Tanaka explained that the Department presented a list to the Governor’s Chief of Staff that totaled $20 million. Committee Chairperson Voss asked if there has been any indication as to why these funds have not been released. Tanaka stated that he does not know why these funds have not been released. He stated that the Department met with the Governor’s Chief of Staff, asked questions, and presented a list of requests. He stated that the Governor’s Chief of Staff would need to review the Department’s list prior to providing answers. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss asked if the Department requested funds for R&M projects or CIP projects. Tanaka stated that the Department requested funds for both R&M and CIP projects. He stated that this might be why the Department has not received these funds. He stated that the explanation and answer is just as critical as the amount. Tanaka emphasized that the Department is open to discussions if agencies do not believe that the Department is properly facilitating projects. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss commented that the Department might need to correct its request if the Governor is not releasing funds due beliefs regarding the Department’s ability to facilitate and complete projects.

Committee Member Kawano asked the Department to resubmit its materials, specifically its CIP reports. He stated that the Department’s graphs and tables show different values and figures and he would like the Department to reconcile its information and prove the Committee with the correct data. Tanaka confirmed that the Department would review and resubmit its materials. Committee Chairperson Uemura requested that the Department resubmit its materials for the Committee’s following meeting in April.

Committee Chairperson Uemura reviewed an update on extra compensation for classroom teachers in special education, hard-to-staff geographical locations, and Hawaiian language immersion programs, including extra compensation funding sources. He stated that he would like to defer any discussion on this agenda item.

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that when the Department presented its proposal to provide pay differentials to certain classes of teachers in December, several Board members had questions regarding how the Department would pay for differentials in the event the Legislature did not approve additional funding. The Department did not have details at that time, so Board members were encouraged to move forward and vote on the proposal with the promise that the Department would provide details to address Board member concerns and questions in January. The information the Department provided in January did not meet the expectations of all Board members, so the Committee placed the item on its February agenda. Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that he realized that Board members would not receive the details they asked for after reviewing the Department’s February 20, 2020 memorandum, in part due to timing, since certain factors have yet to be determined. He stated that he did not believe that discussing pay differentials at the meeting today would result in obtaining the more detailed information than had been requested.

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that he would like to ask that the Superintendent commit to presenting to a joint Finance and Infrastructure-Human Resources committee meeting on May 7, 2020. He would like the Department to commit to presenting on all of the data collected on the five measures to determine whether the pay differential program was successful and all of the financial information on how much the program will cost the Department if it is extended. He stated that May 7, 2020 is a reasonable date because the Department should have sufficient data on the teacher transfer period, it is the last day of Legislative Session so the Department should have a good idea of how much funding the Legislature approved, and it is toward the end of the current fiscal year so the Department should have more firm numbers on various internal funding sources. Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that if the Department provides all of the aforementioned data, he hopes that Board members can review the information, determine whether the program was a success, and make a well-informed decision about whether it makes sense to continue the program.

Kishimoto confirmed that the Department would provide all of the aforementioned data by May 7, 2020, and committed to presenting to the joint committee.

Committee Member De Lima suggested that the Committee defer its discussion to May 21, 2020 instead of May 7, 2020. He stated that the Department would have more accurate information after the conclusion of the Legislative Session.

Committee Chairperson Uemura agreed with Committee Member De Lima’s suggestion and requested that the Department present on the aforementioned data on May 21, 2020. Kishimoto confirmed that the Department could do so.


V. Recommendation for Action

The Committee took this agenda item together with agenda item V.B, entitled “Committee Action on Department of Education’s priority criteria for executing Capital Improvement Program projects (FIC Strategic Priority 2).” See the minutes under agenda item V.B. for the discussion. Committee Chairperson Uemura recommended that the committee defer action on the Department’s R&M priority list and priority criteria for executing CIP projects to provide the Department with additional time to ensure that all of the questions posed by Committee members at previous meetings are answered, all which are memorialized in Board IOUs; the proposals fulfill the intent of the Board policy on Equitable Allocation of Facilities Resources; and the proposals fulfill the Board’s expectations, as described in Committee Vice Chairperson Voss’s November 21, 2019 memorandum on the aforementioned Board policy. He stated that he would like the Department to bring its proposals to the Committee’s April 16, 2020 meeting.

Committee Member Dwight Takeno moved to defer action on the Department’s R&M priority list and priority criteria for executing CIP projects to the Committee’s April 16, 2020 meeting to provide the Department with additional time to ensure that: (1) all of the questions posed by Committee members at previous meetings are answered (all of which are memorialized in Board IOUs); (2) the proposals fulfill the intent of the Board policy on Equitable Allocation of Facilities Resources; and (3) the proposals fulfill the Board’s expectations, as described in Committee Vice Chairperson Voss’s November 21, 2019 memorandum on the aforementioned Board policy. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss seconded.

ACTION: Motion to defer action on the Department’s R&M priority list and priority criteria for executing CIP projects to the Committee’s April 16, 2020 meeting to provide the Department with additional time to ensure that: (1) all of the questions posed by Committee members at previous meetings are answered; (2) the proposals fulfill the intent of the Board policy on Equitable Allocation of Facilities Resources; and (3) the proposals fulfill the Board’s expectations, as described in Committee Vice Chairperson Voss’s November 21, 2019 memorandum on the aforementioned Board policy (Takeno/Voss). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that he would like to review a new process for voting that he is instituting for the Committee. He stated that he would take a roll call vote for substantive action items and have each Committee member register their vote individually. He noted that the previous action was procedural (determining when an action will occur); it was not substantive, where the merits of the proposal are considered. Because the previous action was procedural, a simple voice vote was sufficient. He stated that the Committee would be considering the merits of the proposal for the next agenda item, so he will take a roll call vote.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked Committee members to refer to their materials regarding Board policy positions for the 2020 Legislative Session, specifically the establishment of a separate entity responsible for public school facilities.

Committee Member De Lima moved to approve the amendments to the Board’s policy positions it adopted at its September 19, 2020 general business meeting for the 2020 Legislative Session, as described in Legislative Ad Hoc Committee Chairperson Payne’s memorandum dated February 20, 2020. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss seconded.

Committee Member Catherine Payne stated that the ad hoc committee was not prepared for House Bill (“HB”) 2544, relating to a school facilities agency, or Senate Bill (“SB”) 3103, relating to a school facilities agency. She noted that the Legislature did not include the ad hoc committee in discussions regarding the contemplation of these bills and only marginally included the Department. She stated that the ad hoc committee supports legislation that assists schools in receiving better facilities, but the bills are unclear and clarification is needed. She expressed concern that the legislation proposes transitions in July and noted that huge operational shifts would need to occur within the Department. She also expressed concern that a separate entity responsible for public school facilities could overrule the Board on issues that the Board determined are priorities. Committee Member Payne stated that some legislators have expressed frustration that the Department has not acted upon facilities priorities they included in budget bills. She noted that these bills are a result of this frustration.

Committee Member Payne stated that the Board would need to tread carefully in how it moves forward because facilities are heavily linked to Department programs, equity, and Board priorities. She stated that the ad hoc committee supports legislation that would help schools develop and achieve better facilities and noted that these bills might help with these goals. However, clarity is needed regarding roll outs. She expressed concern that the legislation would require roll outs to begin July 1, 2020.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss stated that the establishment of a separate entity responsible for public school facilities is a useful concept and expressed appreciation for the Legislature. He expressed concern that the legislation is in its infancy and expressed further concern that there are many unanswered questions. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss stated that the legislation is unclear regarding who would have authority over a separate entity, and it is unclear whether the separate entity would be required to fill the needs and priorities the Department established as necessary for student achievement. He noted that the Board’s recent policy related to the Committee’s priorities and expressed concern that the separate entity might be able to act on its own. He emphasized the importance of the Legislature addressing these issues and concerns in future drafts of the legislation. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss expressed further concern regarding funding. He stated that one of the Department’s biggest challenges is its ability to attract experienced, professional staff, in particular project managers, architects, and engineers. He stated that a separate entity would have similar challenges if the Legislature did not provide sufficient funding. He stated that he would like the Committee to revise its Department policy positions to include that the Board supports legislation that provides sufficient funding for a separate entity to fulfill its mission. He noted that sufficient funding would provide an agency with the ability to hire qualified professionals to correct long-standing problems.

Committee Member De Lima expressed concern regarding HB 2544 and SB 3103. He noted that projections and need have historically driven school facilities. He expressed concern that a separate entity’s plans for school facilities might not meet the Department’s projected needs if there is no connection between legislator-driven projects and the Department’s needs. He noted that a separate agency might be driven by criteria that is separate from the Department’s primary mission. He expressed concern that the agency would be tied to the Department for administrative purposes similar to agencies with oversight over preschools. He stated that the Legislature might review current employee counts within the Department’s facility divisions and determine that a number of employees should be assigned to the new agency. He expressed concern that these bills might create additional challenges and expressed further concern that these bills might be unconstitutional. He stated that he does not support the ad hoc committee’s recommendations.

Committee Member Payne stated that the legislation is currently unclear and in need of clarification. She noted that it is unclear whether all CIP projects would fall under the Department or the new agency. She stated that the Department might have authority and oversight over some CIP projects while other CIP projects move to the new agency. This might require duplicate staffing and present additional challenges due to current issues related to staffing and hiring. She reiterated that the ad hoc committee supports proposed legislation that helps with the development of facilities. She noted that the Legislature could have addressed these questions and concerns if it had included the Board in earlier discussions.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss emphasized that while Committee Member De Lima has valid concerns, the ad hoc committee would not support the legislation as currently drafted because the current legislation does not address any of the Committee’s concerns. He stated that the ad hoc committee would not support any legislation unless and until it addresses questions and concerns.

Committee Member Kawano stated that is appears as though the Committee has three options. The Committee could vote against Committee Member Payne’s memorandum if the Committee did not support the legislation, the Committee could support Committee Member Payne’s memorandum if the Committee supports the legislation, or the Committee could support Committee Member Payne’s memorandum if the Committee supports the legislation with specific conditions. He stated that he is having difficulty understanding the action the Committee is deliberating.

Committee Chairperson Uemura clarified that the Committee is taking action on the Board’s policy positions, specifically, the recommendations in Committee Member Payne’s memorandum dated February 20, 2020, which were to add policy positions to the Department positions, specifically that the Board supports proposed legislation that creates a separate attached agency responsible for the construction and maintenance of school facilities, provided that the legislation clearly delineates the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the agency, the Department, and the Board as they relate to public school land and facilities; maintains the Board’s jurisdiction over school facilities by assigning governance authority over the agency to the Board; and ensures a transition of duties and responsibilities from the Department to the agency that does not interfere with operations, delay projects, or otherwise negatively affect the ongoing facilities needs of public schools. Committee Member Payne also recommended that the Committee approve amending one of the general policy positions the Board does not support, specifically that the Board does not support legislation that requires the Board to assume management responsibilities over employees other than the Superintendent of Education and the State Librarian, or heads of other agencies over which the Board has governance authority, rather than remain focused on its constitutional responsibility of policymaking.

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that if the Board were to approve the recommendations it would not support legislation that did not address questions or concerns because as described in Committee Member Payne’s memorandum, the Board would only support legislation that met specific criteria. The Board would not support legislation related to the separate entity that did not meet this criteria. The second portion of Committee Member Payne’s recommendation relates to the Board maintaining oversight over potential agencies.

Committee Member Payne expressed concern that the ad hoc committee could not testify on these legislative bills until the Board approves the additional policy positions. She emphasized the importance of the ad hoc committee having a voice as bills pass through the Legislature. She stated that the Legislature might assume the Board supports certain bills if the ad hoc committee does not submit testimony. She stated that approval of additional policy positions provides the Board with opportunities to relay its specific concerns.

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that the Committee’s responsibility is to determine approval of a policy position rather than specific legislation. He detailed that he has attended meetings with various parties and that the Legislature is aware of various concerns and the parts of the bills it would need to address. He stated that other agencies have brought up similar concerns in testimony on the original draft of the bill. He noted that he is requesting that the Committee review Committee Member Payne’s recommendation regarding the Board’s policy position so that the ad hoc committee is able to take a position on bills. He reiterated that the recommendation is regarding policy positions and not specific legislation.

Committee Member De Lima stated that he does not support the separate entity referenced in legislation and noted that the Department should receive similar authorities and waivers to be able to complete projects more efficiently. He stated that separate entities simply create additional levels of bureaucracy.

Committee Member Payne asked if Committee Member De Lima had suggestions as to how to amend her recommendation. Committee Member De Lima stated that he does not support separate attached agencies responsible for the construction and maintenance of school facilities, would like the Legislature to grant the Department the authority potentially being afforded to this agency, and believes that the Department should receive the same proposed waivers to perform these functions.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented that during Committee meetings, the Department has expressed that it does not have the capacity to complete all of its R&M and CIP projects. He noted that the Department might not have the capacity even if the Legislature were to provide additional funding. He stated that the Department is revising job descriptions to address hiring challenges but still has difficulties hiring enough experienced professionals to fix vacancies. He noted that one of the Department’s reasons for failing to attract potential hires is it cannot pay employees the kinds of high salaries that they would receive in the private sector. He stated that it might be more efficient for the Department to focus on R&M projects rather than all R&M and CIP projects.

Committee Member Payne suggested an amendment to the main motion to change the first part of the sentence to read, “the Board supports proposed legislation that improves processes for construction and maintenance of school facilities.” The Committee discussed how to improve the contemplated amendment. Committee Member De Lima suggested revising Committee Member Payne’s amendment to include “and resources” after “processes.”

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented that the purpose of the Committee’s action is to allow the ad hoc committee to testify on legislation and engage with the Legislature. He noted that the ad hoc committee is unable to do so with the current policy positions.

Committee Member De Lima suggested that the Committee remove the reference to “separate attached agency” in the amendment. Committee Member Takeno suggested that the Committee remove the three conditions (delineation of powers, Board jurisdiction, and transition) in Committee Member Payne’s recommendations in addition to the amendments to the first sentence.

Committee Member De Lima moved to amend the main motion to change the new proposed policy position in Committee Member Payne’s February 20, 2020 memorandum from “The Board supports proposed legislation that creates a separate attached agency responsible for the construction and maintenance of school facilities, provided that the legislation clearly delineates the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the agency, the Department, and the Board as they relate to public school land and facilities; maintains the Board’s jurisdiction over school facilities by assigning governance authority over the agency to the Board; and ensures a transition of duties and responsibilities from the Department to the agency that does not interfere with operations, delay projects, or otherwise negatively affect the ongoing facilities needs of public schools” to “The Board supports proposed legislation that improves processes and resources for the construction and maintenance of school facilities.” Committee Member Cox seconded.

Committee Member Kawano asked about the second part of the recommendation in Committee Member Payne’s memorandum. Committee Member Payne stated that Committee members have only made amendments to the first part.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss stated that the purpose of amending the Board’s policy positions is to provide the ad hoc committee with direction so it is able to take a position on the aforementioned legislation. He stated that the Legislature is proposing a separate state agency for facilities, even though Committee members might not support a separate agency. He stated that the Committee is ignoring what the legislation ultimately seeks to create. The purpose of Committee Member Payne’s original recommendation was to allow the ad hoc committee to engage in the conversation. The ad hoc committee’s role is to participate in the legislative session and provide input to ensure that the Department and students’ needs are protected. He stated that the original recommendation is more appropriate for this purpose.

Committee Member De Lima stated that he understands Committee Vice Chairperson Voss’s position. He noted that the Legislature is unhappy in regards to the construction and maintenance of school facilities. The Board is also unhappy with the lack of progress. He stated that the original recommendation maintains that the Board supports the proposal under certain conditions. However, the Board should express that the Department has been working to address issues and challenges, has remained critical, and hired a new assistant superintendent to oversee facilities. He stated that a separate state agency would encounter similar challenges and issues, including hiring, resources, and implementation challenges. He noted that the Board should support the Legislature providing similar authority and resources to the Department rather than to a new agency with unknown personnel, job descriptions, and timetables. He noted that this simply adds another layer of bureaucracy to solve issues the Department is already attempting to solve. He explained that this is why he suggested the aforementioned amendments.

Committee Chairperson Uemura agreed with Committee Vice Chairperson Voss. He stated that the amendments defeat the purpose of the recommendation. The ad hoc committee needs direction. He noted that the amendments do not address the Committee’s various concerns and questions.

Committee Chairperson Uemura called for a roll call vote on the secondary motion to amend the main motion. The secondary motion carried with Committee Members Cox, De Lima, Kawano, Payne, and Takeno voting aye, and Committee Vice Chairperson Voss and Committee Member Namauʻu voting nay.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss asked about the ad hoc committee’s role as a result of the Committee’s amendment of the main motion. Committee Member De Lima commented that the new facilities agency would encounter the same challenges that currently exist within the Department. He noted that these issues would still exist regardless of which agency had oversight over facilities.

Committee Member Takeno commented that the amendment provides the ad hoc committee with the ability to take a broad position and address concerns as bills evolve. He noted that the ad hoc committee would be able to submit testimony on different versions of legislation and either support, oppose, or comment on legislation based on whether the legislation supports the general policy position and what the Board is attempting to accomplish. He stated that the Board supports legislation that provides resources.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented that the ad hoc committee could support providing resources to a new facilities agency rather than the Department. Committee Member Takeno commented that bills evolve over time and could look very different as bills pass through the Legislature.

Committee Member Payne stated that oftentimes the ad hoc committee submits testimony with comments. She emphasized the importance of the ad hoc committee being able to address its concerns and convey the Board’s priorities during hearings and private conversations.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss asked if the Committee agrees with Committee Member Takeno’s comments regarding the intent of the amendment and flexibility it provides to the ad hoc committee. If so, he stated that the ad hoc committee would proceed on this assumption.

Committee Member Namauʻu stated that the amendment provides the ad hoc committee with the opportunity to engage and be a part of conversations.

Committee Member De Lima stated that he agrees with Committee Member Takeno’s interpretation. He stated that he does not support a separate facilities agency, but if an agency were to exist, he supports the Board assuming management responsibilities over heads of other agencies over which the Board has governance authority.

Committee Chairperson Uemura called for a roll call vote on the amended main motion. The motion carried unanimously with all members present (Committee Vice Chairperson Voss, Committee Members Cox, Kawano, Namauʻu, Payne, and Takeno) voting aye.

Action: Motion to recommend the Board amend the Board policy positions adopted at its September 19, 2020 general business meeting to: (1) include the statement: “The Board supports proposed legislation that improves processes and resources for the construction and maintenance of school facilities” under its Department of Education Policy Positions and (2) insert the underlined language into the third bulleted statement in the Board’s General Policy Positions as follows: “The Board does not support proposed legislation that: Requires the Board to assume management responsibilities over employees other than the Superintendent of Education and the State Librarian (or heads of other agencies over which the Board has governance authority) rather than remain focused on its constitutional responsibility of policymaking.” (Payne/De Lima). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.

VI. Adjournment

Committee Chairperson Uemura adjourned the meeting at 11:41 a.m.