Committee Member Nolan Kawano entered at 11:14 a.m.

Discussion Items

A. Update on extra compensation for classroom teachers in special education, hard-to-staff geographical locations, and Hawaiian language immersion programs: Extra compensation funding sources

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that the purpose of the Department’s memorandum is to update the Committee on the sources of the funds for the extra teacher compensation approved by the Board on December 5, 2019. He noted that the Board approved extra compensation for classroom teachers in special education, hard-to-staff geographical locations, and Hawaiian language immersion programs with the expectation that the Department would provide additional details and clarification in January to address concerns and questions.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked the Committee to focus on the following concerns and questions when discussing the information provided by the Department. First, there are three identifiable funding periods, including the six months remaining in fiscal year 2020 and 12 months in fiscal year 2021. He noted that the Department stated that the funding for these periods would come from the Governor’s budget. The third identifiable funding period is for the 2022 fiscal year and beyond. The Department stated that its base budget would include funding for this period. Second, he asked how the Department would fund the extra compensation should the Legislature not fund each of these periods. He noted that the Department stated that school-level programs would not be impacted. He asked how reduction in funding and financial impacts would affect strategic outcomes. He noted that it is important to see the trade-offs due to the Department placing extra compensation as a high priority. Third, metric data collection is necessary but so is the interpretation of the data and next steps. He asked about the Department’s five measures that it was going to use to measure success. He noted that the Department stated that it would provide all of this information in January.

Committee Vice Chairperson Bruce Voss agreed with Committee Chairperson Uemura. He stated that the Committee should review funding sources step-by-step for each of the three periods. He asked how the Department would fund $10.5 million for the current fiscal year if the Legislature chooses not to fund this amount. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss expressed concern that the Department’s memorandum lists possible options but does not provide a comprehensive plan. He stated that the Department did not provide specifics as to where this amount would come from in its budget and how budgeting for this amount would specifically affect programs and students. He stated that he would appreciate as many details as possible regarding internal sources of funding and impacts.

Brian Hallett, Interim Assistant Superintendent and Chief Financial Officer, Office of Fiscal Services, stated that the Department’s memorandum provides hypothetical answers to these questions and includes a list of available options. He detailed that the Department built its budget based on its request to the Governor and the Governor’s incorporation of this request into his budget. He noted that the Department revised its request for the 2019-2020 fiscal year from $14.5 million to $10.5 million due to timing changes the Department made.

Hallett reviewed the Department’s contingency planning. He stated that the Department would look to a number of potential one-time measures to pay for differentials and balance its budget while ensuring school-level funding would remain intact if the Legislature did not approve the request for funding in the current fiscal year. He detailed that the measures would include: (1) seeking relief from the Governor’s five percent hard restriction of $5.4 million; (2) applying a portion of the 2019-2020 fiscal year centralized general fund carryover from EDN 100 and EDN 700; (3) applying a portion of the funds transferred to the Department from charter schools budget, EDN 600, as part of annual per-pupil funding “true-up” required by Hawaii Revised Statutes 302D-28; and (4) reassessing budget requirements for other recruitment and retention program funds. He stated that the second through fourth options are straightforward and would not have a tremendous impact on programs.

Hallett reviewed the anticipated impacts of meeting the Governor’s five percent restriction and stated that the Department would need to impose restrictions at a program level to fund the differentials. He noted that the Department was hoping to use the restriction to restore programs. He detailed that the Department’s memorandum explains the impacts and consequences of committing this funding to fund differentials rather than programs.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented that the five areas in the Department’s memorandum would be affected if the Governor did not release the hard restriction. Hallett detailed that the Department’s memorandum explains impacts on information technology programs, kindergarten assessments, and capacity building within fiscal services.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss stated that all of these programs would be affected if the Governor releases the hard restriction and the Department uses the $5.4 million to pay for the differentials. Hallett confirmed that this is correct. He stated that this is not the Department’s preferred option.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss stated that he wants more specifics. He noted that this option is the Department’s last resort due to the effects on programs, employees, and students. He asked how the Department would fund $10.5 million if the Legislature does not approve the Department’s request. Hallett asked for clarification. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss reiterated that seeking relief from the Governor’s five percent hard restriction of $5.4 million should be the last resort because this would affect programs. He stated that the Department would need to fund $10.5 million from its other three options and asked how the Department plans to do so. Hallett stated that the Department would need to determine how to cover an additional $5.1 million to fund the differentials if the Department sought relief from the Governor’s five percent hard restriction.

Committee Member Nolan Kawano asked about the Department’s plans to fund the differentials if the five percent hard restriction were not an option. Hallett stated that the Department could review its three other options, such as applying a portion of its carryover from EDN 100 and EDN 700, applying a portion of the funds transferred to the Department from charter schools budget, or applying $500,00 to $600,000 from recruitment and retention program funds.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss stated that the Department would still need to fund $10 million if it were to apply $500,000 from recruitment and retention program funds. Hallett detailed that the amount transferred to the Department from the charter school budget would be approximately $1 million. He stated that the Department already receives this funding and typically applies it to shortfall areas, such as workers compensation or resources for new facilities. Christina Kishimoto, Superintendent, explained that the Department’s memorandum lists the programs that would be affected if the Department does not receive funding from the Legislature.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss noted that the Department made representations to the Legislature that it could fund the differentials if the Legislature did not approve funding. He stated that he does not understand how the Department plans to fund the differentials and noted that the Department’s plan does not add up to $10.5 million. He stated that he would like to know the Department’s options, how much is available in each category, and impacts on programs.

Hallett explained that the Department’s goal in the first year is to minimize impacts on schools. He detailed that the Department is reviewing funds that are not committed to worker’s compensation. He noted that the Department would carryover a deficit that would compound if it did not address worker’s compensation and noted that worker’s compensation was not funded at the requested level in the previous year. He stated that the Department is reviewing short-term measures that would lessen the impact on schools to the extent possible this year.

Committee Member Catherine Payne commented that the five percent restriction totaling $5.4 million would pay for the differentials if the Department had no other option. She noted that it appears as though the Department’s memorandum lists where that money would go if the Department does not use it for the differentials. Hallett confirmed that otherwise the $5.4 million would go to the areas listed in the Department’s memorandum.

Committee Member Payne commented that the Department would be unable to use the Governor’s five percent restriction to support these areas if the Department had to use the $5.4 million for the differentials because of a lack of funding from the Legislature. She noted that if the Governor releases the five percent restriction and the Legislature provides funding for differentials then the Department would be able to use the $5.4 million to support the areas listed in the Department’s memorandum. She stated that she believes this is where the misunderstanding is between Committee members and Hallett. Committee Member Payne stated that it appears as though the Department does have a way in which to fund the differentials if the Legislature does not provide funding. She noted that the Department could assume the Governor would release $5.4 million, the charter school budget provides the Department with $1 million, funds from recruitment and retention total $600,000, and the balance of funds from EDN 100 and 700 carryover is estimated at $3 million. Hallett confirmed that this correct.

Committee Member Brian De Lima commented that last fiscal year the Department carried over $13.2 million of non-Weighted Student Formula (“WSF”) funds. He added that this fiscal year there would be funds that the Department does not spend nor encumber. Based on past trends the amount might be over $10 million. Hallett stated that this is not correct.

Committee Member De Lima asked about this year’s carryover amount. Hallett explained that the Department had over $7 million in carryover funds within EDN 150, which are funds the Department does not use for other areas. He detailed that the Department rebalanced and reviewed its base budget in the last year. The Department assumed $18 million in costs for this fiscal year within its existing budget and assumed $21 million of additional costs for next fiscal year. He detailed trade-offs and transfers and noted that the Department tightened up its budget. He stated that it is unreasonable to assume that the carryover amount available last year into this year would automatically be available at the end of this year. He noted that the Department is working with a different budget this year compared to last.

Committee Member De Lima agreed that the Department should be as conservative as possible. However, the likelihood that the Department would exhaust all of its non-WSF funds when its budget is over $1 billion is unrealistic.

Committee Member De Lima asked about impact aid funds. He noted that the Department previously reported that it received $40 million. He asked about the budgeted amount for impact aid. Hallett stated that the Department budgeted approximately $45 million and detailed numbers of students and applications.

Committee Member De Lima commented that the Department does not necessarily spend the amount it budgets for. Hallett explained that the Department budgets for the current year. In some years the Department received as high as $52 million and invested extra funds in other ways, such as supplemental weights in student formulas. Committee Member De Lima asked about funding for substitute teachers. Hallett explained that the Department relies on impact aid funds to pay for substitute teachers. Committee Member De Lima commented that the Department does not always spend $45 million per year on substitute teachers. Hallett stated that the Department incurs about $45 million for substitute teacher costs. He detailed that the Department has non-WSF funds and other funds the Department does not spend on substitute teachers. He stated that he is unsure of what the total numbers will look like and described programmatic impacts. Hallett explained that non-WSF funds might not be sufficient and explained that the Department is statutorily mandated to not create deficits otherwise it may be held personally liable. Hallett detailed that the Department received four payments for impact aid last year instead of three and may only receive two payments this year. He noted that the amount might be considerably less than the historic $45 million. Hallett encouraged the Committee to remain cautious. He stated that the Department is taking on new expenses and either has to determine how to fund differentials from within or seek new resources. He noted that there is a lot of focus on the Department funding from within. He detailed that the Department has been tightening up its budget and noted that there is uncertainty regarding impact aid amounts, the federal government, and continued resolutions passed last year. He stated that the Department is taking on more risk which takes away the Department’s flexibility in managing that risk. The Department’s goal is to prevent this risk from affecting schools to the extent possible. He noted that the Department could find ways in which to fund differentials from within but this would impact programs. The Department is trying to avoid impacting schools.

Committee Member Kawano asked about the Department’s downward revision of differential costs. Hallett explained that historically the Department has paid bonuses within the fiscal year. He detailed that the Department would pay 14 payments for benefits earned for differentials for those employees for this fiscal year. The payments are stretched out over this year and next year. He detailed that the Department is pushing some of the $14 million to the next fiscal year.

Committee Member Kawano asked if the Department is paying differentials at one time or spreading out the differentials over two school years or two fiscal years. Hallett explained that teachers start on August 1 and detailed that payments are spread across 12 months. He noted that returning teachers continue to receive payments over the summer but detailed that payments over the summer are for both the following school year and prior year’s work. He explained that the Department is shifting some of this cost and spreading the differentials out across two years.

Committee Member Kawano commented that the Department is spreading the differential across three fiscal years and should review payments for the 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2021-2022 fiscal years. He stated that the Department created an obligation and thus would need to fund the amounts. He asked what the amount was attributed to the third fiscal year and whether these amounts contemplate additional teachers who might move to differential categories or are based on the number of existing teachers within hard-to-staff areas. Hallett commented that each year the Department would carry over $4 million from the 2019-2020 fiscal year to the 2020-2021 fiscal year. Committee Member Kawano commented that $4 or $5 million would be carried over to the third fiscal year. Hallett stated that the cost would still be approximately $26 million. Committee Member Kawano detailed determinations on a cash basis. He commented that the Department would need $10.5 million for the 2019-2020 fiscal year but some cash payments would linger into the 2020-2021 fiscal year. Hallett stated that the proposal does not have an end date so the Department would need $26 million. He explained that if the proposal ends the next fiscal year the Department is still obligated to pay for the 2021-2022 fiscal year.

Committee Member Kawano asked if the Department’s projections for the next fiscal year are based on the number of teachers in hard-to-staff areas or vacancies. Hallett stated that projections are based on current numbers so if more teachers move this might increase. Committee Member Kawano noted that it is not a matter of “if.” He emphasized that the Department proposed this plan because it would work to fill hard-to-staff positions. He stated that the Committee needed a better understanding of what totals would amount to if the Department were to fill all of its positions. He stated that he would like to know what the amounts would be if the Department filled half of its positions or filled positions at different percentages. He noted that the Department could not request $26.5 million from the Legislature based on current needs and then realize it needed additional funds because its proposal worked to increase the number of teachers in various areas. Hallett explained that the Department has discussed these issues with legislative staff and the Department of Budget and Finance (“B&F”). He explained that the Department would require a memorandum from the Governor to the Legislature to formally change its numbers. Committee Member Kawano asked what the amount could increase to. Hallett stated that the Department understands there may be changes. He noted that the Department is trying to not make changes on a weekly basis. The Department reduced its amount from $14.5 million to $10.5 million based on timing shifts. He stated that the Department is reviewing potential impacts based on the differentials resulting in intended consequences. The Department potentially might need millions, perhaps $3 to $5 million.

Kishimoto stated that the Department expects difficulties but also expects to be successful. She stated that the Department is meeting with legislators and expects cost escalations but it is difficult to predict rates. She noted that the Department could come to an agreement regarding how to escalate and project numbers but numbers may not be accurate until the Department is able to review how the proposal affects hard-to-fill positions. She noted that the Department expects the $26 million amount to increase because it expects it will fill more positions. Committee Member Kawano asked what the total amount would be if the Department had a 100% success rate. He stated that the Department has not informed the Committee of projected amounts and asked about potential additional costs. Kishimoto stated that the Department could generate amounts based on current demands and provide the Committee with this information prior to the next Board meeting. She stated that the Department’s target from December 5, 2019 was 96% but the Department could project and estimate amounts based on different percentages of filled positions.

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that the Board asked questions regarding correct amounts and projections if the proposal were successful at filling vacancies at its December 5, 2019 meeting. He stated that the Legislature would want to know projections and totals if the Department expressed that the cost might escalate. He stated that his expectation was that the Department would provide the Committee with a forecast, but the Department did not provide this information. Cynthia Covell, Assistant Superintendent, Office of Talent Management, detailed that the Department has projections based on current position counts. She noted that the base numbers might change because principals buy and sell special education positions but the Department does not expect significant changes. The Department currently has 2,225 positions. The Department had 1,690 teachers when it began its calculations but the current count is 1,794. The Department’s estimates are based on State-approved teacher education program goals. If the Department fills 96% of positions then the Department would have 2,966 teachers. If the Department fills the maximum amount, then the number would increase to 2,225. She stated that the Department could provide the Committee with calculations. She noted that the denominator could change if principals buy fewer special education teachers based on decreases in student populations.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked what the Department anticipates will happen. Covell stated that the Department would be able to review behavior for the 2020-2021 school year. She noted that over 1,000 special education teachers are in general education. A percentage of those teachers could move over during the spring which is why the Department did not want to wait a year to present its proposal. She noted that if a percentage of general education teachers move to special education it would fill the gap to reach the Department’s goal of filling 96% of vacancies. She detailed that the Department has current numbers and anticipated fill rates.

Committee Member Kawano commented that the Department would need around $4 million for special education differentials and another $4 million or so for hard-to-fill differentials. Covell stated that there are 80 Hawaiian immersion teachers. Hallett stated that the Department could calculate amounts and estimates and provide the Committee with this information.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented that the Department stated that it would measure its success rate using five measures. He emphasized the importance of projections and determining costs based on various totals. He asked about the Department’s calculations based on different generated amounts. Covell stated that the Department developed estimates based on different projections with B&F when it first approached the Governor with its proposals. She noted that the Department estimated minimum and maximum projections but is unsure of what the exact numbers will be. Hallett stated that it is not an exact science and there are many variables. He stated that the Department needs teachers to build capacity.

Committee Chairperson Uemura expressed concern that the Department did not provide the Committee with enough information or data, including projections and anticipations. He stated that Committee Member Payne’s earlier explanation regarding the Governor’s restriction was confusing. Committee Chairperson Uemura commented that the Department’s memorandum shows that the Department would seek relief from the Governor’s restriction to apply to the differentials if the Legislature does not provide the Department with funding. The Department would need to review other impacts if the Governor does not release the restriction. Hallett stated that these are assumed impacts. He noted that there would be impacts if the Governor does release the restriction but the Department uses those funds for differentials.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented on the Department’s proposed plan to apply a portion of the centralized general fund carryover from EDN 100 and EDN 700 to the differentials. He agreed with Committee Member De Lima’s suggestion for the Department to review impact aid funds and non-WSF funds. He noted that EDN 100 has funds other than WSF and asked about total amounts. Hallett stated that he does not have this information but recalls that less than $1 million is available.

Committee Member De Lima stated that the Committee received a memorandum from the Department on September 19, 2019 that detailed that the Department had $13.2 million in non-WSF funds. Hallett stated that $7 million of that total was within EDN 150. He explained that non-WSF does not always fall under centralized carryover. The Department returns funds allocated for schools to schools. Committee Member De Lima suggested that Hallett read his office’s memorandum from September. Hallett confirmed that he would review the memorandum from September 19, 2019 and clarify information for the Committee.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked how the Department’s second option would affect charter schools. Hallett explained that there is a “true-up” each year.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked about applying funds from recruitment and retention programs. Hallett explained changes to teacher licenses in the last year. He stated that the Department was paying for licensing from special funds to support the Hawaii Teacher Standards Board (“HTSB”). However, the Legislature determined that it would fund HTSB directly so the Department no longer needed to use those funds for that purpose.

Committee Chairperson Uemura asked if the recruitment and retention section was in need of those funds for other programs other than licensing or if those funds were available. Hallett stated that he believes the Department could commit these funds to differentials. Covell added that recruitment and retention could use these funds, but it has not used these funds in the past and has requested federal funds instead.

Committee Member De Lima asked whether programs would be affected this fiscal year. He stated that the Department developed a practical proposal but there would be impacts if the Legislature does not fund the differentials and it is important to understand these impacts. He commented that his earlier comments relate to whether there are other funds the Department could use to pay the differentials. He stated that he understands that the Department is unaware of carryover amounts until the end of the fiscal year and cannot have deficits. He commented that the Department collected $55 million in federal impact aid in the last year. The Department budgeted for $45 million but only spent $39 million on substitute teachers. He stated that it appears as though there could be some carryover. However, in previous years the Department only collected $40 million. Committee Member De Lima stated that it is important to have these discussions because the Department did not review impact aid as one of its options. He detailed the elected Board’s practices, including sharing collected amounts for Board programs. He noted that the appointed Board has never used impact aid funds because there are not enough funds and the Superintendent attempts to meet the Board’s needs. He stated that he would like the Department to review whether it would be possible to fund differentials with impact aid funds.

Committee Member De Lima commented that the Department’s reports show how much the Department spends in each categories and carryover amounts. He stated that the Department should have an idea of how much it might carryover at the end of the year and added that he believes the amount would align with historical amounts. He stated that the Department could review using these funds to fund differentials.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss emphasized the importance of discussions regarding extra compensation funding sources. He expressed concern regarding the Department’s lack of a specific plan to fund the differentials. He stated that the Legislature will have concerns if the Department is unable to show how it will fund differentials internally. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss detailed that funding internally will affect recruitment and retention, critical upgrades to information technology, assessment and accountability, and the Department’s ability to develop new programs for assessment. He stated that the Department would need to emphasize and highlight how its programs would be negatively affected if the Legislature does not provide additional funds and the Department has to fund differentials from its existing budget. He stated that the Department’s memorandum does not contain specific information or showcase a specific plan. He emphasized that the Department would need to develop a specific plan showing how it would fund $10 million, how this would affect its programs, and why it needs the Legislature’s support.

Committee Chairperson Uemura suggested tabling the discussion. He asked the Department to present on specifics at the Committee’s next meeting. Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that the Department’s presentation should take the Committee’s concerns and suggestions into consideration.

Kishimoto confirmed that the Department could do this. She asked if the Board’s Legislative Ad Hoc Committee could work with the Department on its strategy and expressed concern that the Department might not be able to vet its full strategy in Committee meetings. She noted that the Department’s strategy might change based on discussions with legislators. She emphasized the importance of the Department politically positioning itself in a way in which it could show different sectors the importance of the Department’s proposal. Kishimoto stated that it is unacceptable that 600 classrooms do not have a certified teacher. She stated that the Department is aggressively pushing its political strategy. She stated that the fact that 600 children do not have a certified teacher is more important than funds or sacrifices. She stated that she does not want to lose this message amidst discussions regarding finances. She stated that it is easy to forget that 600 classrooms are struggling when discussing bottom-line dollars. Kishimoto stated that the issue goes beyond funding and emphasized that this is a moral, equity, and quality issue. She noted that the Department could provide the Committee with numbers but it does not want to lead with numbers. The Department wants to lead with the faces of children who do not have SPED teachers to engage them at a high level.

IV. Recommendation for Action

A. Committee Action on recommendation regarding approval of two public school land sites to lease pursuant to Act 155 (Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 302A-1151.1, Pilot program for lease of public school land) for further due diligence and investigation to replace two of the three sites approved by the Board on January 17, 2019 (475 22^nd Avenue and 4087 Diamond Head): Kaimuki High School and Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School

Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that he would like to remind the Committee that it is only considering the approval of the two replacement sites for further due diligence and investigation. The possible use of the sites, which is described in the memorandum from the Department, is not up for discussion since the due diligence and investigative work should result in the highest and best use of the sites. After the Department completes its due diligence and investigation, the Committee will decide which sites to develop; the action being contemplated today is not for approval of the sites that will be developed. He stated that he would also like to discuss the rescinding of the approval for two of the three originally approved sites and why the replacement projects are being proposed.

Committee Chairperson Uemura detailed the history of Act 155, including the Committee’s approval of Act 155 sites for due diligence and investigation in the past. He noted that McKinley High School, Kaimuki High School, and Queen Kaahumanu Elementary school were at the top of the short list of potential school sites for development by Jacobs Engineering. However, the Department did not recommend these sites as finalists.

Committee Member Payne clarified that there has never been any discussion regarding moving Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School to the Kaimuki High School campus. She stated that the Department’s memorandum appears to have confused the public. She noted that she does not want inaccurate messages relayed to the community based on the Department’s memorandum.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss stated that it appears as though the Department’s recommendation is for the Committee to approve Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School and Kaimuki High School as Act 155 sites. He noted that McKinley High School is a potential Act 155 site. Committee Chairperson Uemura clarified that discussion regarding Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School includes McKinley High School. However, McKinley High School would not be under consideration unless the Committee approved Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School. He stated that investigative work would determine whether Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School should move to McKinley High School. Committee Vice Chairperson Voss commented that there is a possibility that someone could challenge these sites in the future because McKinley High School was not included in the list of original sites. He stated that it does not make sense to not add McKinley High School as a potential site for the Department to review.

Committee Member De Lima commented that he is against the Department’s recommendations regarding Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School.

Committee Member Kawano commented that the Committee is able to approve three sites for further due diligence and investigation. He noted that McKinley High School is not up for discussion at this point. He agreed with Committee Vice Chairperson Voss, but stated that the Committee is approving sites for due diligence. He stated that the Department’s memorandum is misleading and confusing in terms of Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School.

Committee Member Payne moved to approve Kaimuki High School and Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School to replace two of the three sites (475 22^nd Avenue and 4087 Diamond Head) approved by the Board on January 17, 2019 for further due diligence and investigation by the Department. Committee Member Kawano seconded.

Committee Member De Lima stated that he understands that the Committee is approving sites for further due diligence and investigation. However, the Committee’s action might create anxieties for families whose children attend Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School. He detailed discussions from 2011 regarding legislative initiatives to close schools and the Department’s proposal to close Kalihi Elementary School. Committee Member De Lima stated that the Department’s memorandum does not explain how its recommendations support student achievement. He stated that communities should be able to understand when proposals support student achievement and improve schools and communities. He stated that he views the Department’s current proposal as similar to historic proposals regarding school closures. He stated that the Department did not explain how its proposal would help or benefit communities. Committee Member De Lima stated that he believes the Committee would be creating anxiety for families if it were to approve Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School for further due diligence. He stated that there needed to be some explanation of how this would benefit the community. Committee Member De Lima suggested removing Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School from the list of sites.

Committee Member Payne commented that the Legislature suggested that the Department conduct due diligence for Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School. She stated that due diligence might change perception regarding the site. She noted that there is strong interest in the Legislature for the Committee to consider Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School and it might benefit the Committee to direct the Department to conduct due diligence and investigation in order to have influence in terms of Act 155.

Committee Chairperson Uemura expressed concern regarding the proposed school facilities agency legislative bill. He detailed limiting due diligence and investigative work to education components so that the Department could be efficient in how it spends its resources. He noted that a potential school facilities agency might ask the Department about educational requirements for new schools being constructed and the Department should be in a position to share this information. He suggested the Committee limit due diligence to educational components and remove development components.

Committee Member Payne commented that the Legislature has not passed the school facilities agency bill and the Committee should not make assumptions. The Committee and Department still need to conduct comprehensive due diligence. She stated that the Committee could suggest amendments if anything changes. She noted that 21^st century schools includes facilities and how facilities support education.

Committee Vice Chairperson Voss detailed the spirit of Act 155. He emphasized 21^st century schools and utilizing under-utilized facilities and resources. He stated that he agrees with further due diligence and investigation for Kaimuki High School. He detailed that Kaimuki High School is a neglected school to the detriment of its students and opportunities exist for affordable housing. He stated that the Committee would be creating a distraction for no good purpose if it were to approve Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School. He agreed with Committee Member De Lima’s suggestion.

Committee Member Kawano stated that he does not believe Act 155 allows the Department to move a school to a different campus. He stated that his understanding is that Act 155 allows the Department to lease and develop land. He noted that statute does not detail moving schools. Committee Member Kawano commented that moving and closing schools are separate. The Board has policies regarding school closures. He stated that he does not agree with further due diligence for Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School.

Committee Member Margaret Cox detailed that the school population for the elementary school is 500. She detailed how her school population increased over the years and noted that 500 is a good number for an elementary school. Committee Member Cox stated that she does not agree with including Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School.

Committee Member De Lima moved to amend the main motion to remove Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School to replace two of the three sites (475 22^nd Avenue and 4087 Diamond Head) approved by the Board on January 17, 2019 for further due diligence and investigation by the Department. Committee Member Cox seconded.

Committee Member De Lima detailed that Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School could be an option if there was a rethinking regarding how teacher housing could complement the school experience. However, he does not agree with the Department’s proposal and agrees with removing Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School from the list of sites for further due diligence and investigation.

Committee Chairperson Uemura commented that the Committee amended the original motion to remove Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School. He stated that the Committee would still need to take action on approving Kaimuki High School.

Committee Member De Lima moved to amend the main motion to approve Kaimuki High School to replace two of the three sites (475 22^nd Avenue and 4087 Diamond Head) approved by the Board on January 17, 2019 for further due diligence and investigation by the Department. Committee Member Cox seconded.

The Committee voted to amend the main motion to delete the reference to Queen Kaahumanu Elementary School. The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.

The Committee voted on the main motion, as amended.

ACTION: Approve Kaimuki High School to replace two of the three sites (475 22^nd Avenue and 4087 Diamond Head) approved by the Board for further due diligence and investigation by the Department on January 17, 2019 (De Lima/Cox). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.


V. Adjournment

Committee Chairperson Uemura adjourned the meeting at 12:36 p.m.