STAND. COM. REP. NO. 3113
Honolulu, Hawaii
RE: H.B. No. 2031
H.D. 2
S.D. 1
Honorable Ronald D. Kouchi
President of the Senate
Thirty-Third State Legislature
Regular Session of 2026
State of Hawaii
Sir:
Your Committee on Transportation, to which was referred H.B. No. 2031, H.D. 2, entitled:
"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION,"
begs leave to report as follows:
The purpose and intent of this measure is to:
(1) Establish the Administrative Hearings Division within the Department of Transportation and transfer certain administrative hearing powers to the Division, including matters related to transportation network company permit appeals, automated red light camera and speed enforcement traffic citations, and commercial driver's license appeals; and
(2) Allow authorized employees of the Department of Law Enforcement to review images produced by the automated red light camera and speed enforcement systems.
Your Committee received testimony in support of this measure from the Department of Transportation and one individual.
Your Committee received testimony in opposition to this measure from the Hawaii Government Employees Association, AFSCME Local 152, AFL-CIO.
Your Committee received comments on this measure from the Judiciary and Department of the Attorney General.
Your Committee finds that matters within the purview of the Department of Transportation include transportation network company appeals; commercial driver's license suspensions, revocations, and cancellations; and automated red light and speed enforcement citations. However, some of these transportation-related enforcement and appeals matters are processed by the Judiciary rather than the Department of Transportation. This measure will establish the Administrative Hearings Division with the Department of Transportation and convert certain enforcement violations from civil traffic infractions to administrative violations to streamline the administrative hearing process and improve administrative efficiency.
Your Committee notes the concern raised by Hawaii Government Employees Association, AFSCME Local 152, AFL-CIO that exempting any Hearings Officer Appointed by the Director of Transportation from chapter 76, Hawaii Revised Statutes, will allow potential appointees to circumvent a merit-based hiring process, increasing the likelihood that unqualified individuals could be hired. Your Committee also notes the concern raised by the Department of the Attorney General that further clarification of the administrative hearing and judicial review processes are necessary to support the stated intent of this measure. Therefore, amendments to this measure are necessary to address these concerns.
Your Committee has amended this measure by:
(1) Specifying that any hearings officer appointed to an administrative hearing by the Director of Transportation shall be subject to chapter 76, Hawaii Revised Statutes, relating to civil service law;
(2) Inserting language clarifying that any person issued a traffic citation pursuant to automated red light camera enforcement may contest the citation by submitting a request for an administrative hearing to the Department of Transportation within thirty days of the date that the person receives the citation;
(3) Deleting language that would have provided the procedures for filing a notice of appeal and required the appropriate district court to hold a hearing de novo upon appeal of the administrative hearing decision related to automated red light camera enforcement;
(4) Deleting language that would have required the Hawaii Supreme Court to prescribe rules of procedure for appeals and hearings related to automated red light camera enforcement before the district courts;
(5) Inserting language clarifying that a person aggrieved by an administrative decision related to a citation issued pursuant to automated red light camera enforcement shall be entitled to judicial review if the respondent files a petition with the clerk of the appropriate district court within a certain number of days from the date that the administrative hearing decision is mailed;
(6) Inserting language requiring the appropriate district court to schedule a judicial review of the contested administrative decision relating to automated red light camera enforcement as soon as practicable;
(7) Inserting language clarifying that upon review of the record, the court may affirm the administrative hearing decision related to automated red light camera enforcement, remand the case with instructions for further proceedings, or reverse or modify the decision under certain circumstances;
(8) Inserting language clarifying that any person issued a traffic citation pursuant to automated speed enforcement may contest the citation by submitting a request for an administrative hearing within thirty days of the date that the person receives the citation;
(9) Inserting language clarifying that a person aggrieved by an administrative decision related to a citation issued pursuant to automated speed enforcement shall be entitled to judicial review if the respondent files a petition with the clerk of the appropriate district court within a certain number of days from the date that the administrative hearing decision is mailed;
(10) Inserting language requiring that the appropriate district court shall schedule a judicial review of the contested administrative decision relating to automated speed enforcement as soon as practicable;
(11) Inserting language clarifying that upon review of the record, the court may affirm the administrative hearing decision related to automated speed enforcement, remand the case with instructions for further proceedings, or reverse or modify the decision under certain circumstances;
(12) Specifying that fines for all consequences of a violation initiated by the Automated Speed Enforcement Systems Program may be set, in a manner not inconsistent with any applicable statutory provisions addressing these fines by the Department of Transportation as the Director of Transportation deems necessary;
(13) Inserting language specifying that fines for all consequences of a violation for disregarding a steady red signal initiated by the use of a photo red light imaging detector system may be set, in a manner not inconsistent with any applicable statutory provisions addressing these fines by the Department of Transportation as the Director of Transportation deems necessary;
(14) Deleting language that would have specified that the fines for all consequences of the speed restriction laws under the automated speed enforcement system shall be set by the Department of Transportation as the Director of Transportation deems necessary; and
(15) Making technical, nonsubstantive amendments for the purposes of clarity and consistency.
As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Transportation that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 2031, H.D. 2, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 2031, H.D. 2, S.D. 1, and be referred to your Committees on Judiciary and Ways and Means.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Transportation,
|
|
|
________________________________ LORRAINE R. INOUYE, Chair |
|
|
|
|