A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Committee advances trespass bill after OHA warns of impacts on Native Hawaiian gathering rights

March 26, 2026 | House Public Hearing, House of Representatives, Legislative , Hawaii


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Committee advances trespass bill after OHA warns of impacts on Native Hawaiian gathering rights
The committee voted to pass Senate Bill 2128 SD2 on March 25 after a day of testimony that split along cultural‑rights and agricultural protection lines.

Deputy Attorney General Mark Tom appeared with suggested amendments to align the bill’s forfeiture language with existing statutes governing forfeiture and penalties; the AG’s office recommended moving new provisions into the penalties chapter and clarified statutory cross‑references.

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs opposed the bill in part because it could extend forfeiture provisions to undeveloped private lands and thereby affect Native Hawaiian gathering rights rooted in historical and statutory protections. "Our opposition is actually because of the implication for this to affect lawful native Hawaiian gathering rights on private lands," Lealoha Wakuanani testified, urging lawmakers to consider whether existing statutes already address unlawful hunting and trespass.

Ranching and agricultural groups, including the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council and the Hawaii Farm Bureau, supported the bill as a deterrent to poaching and harmful trespass on ranch and farm lands. Nicole Galassi for the Cattlemen’s Council said forfeiture of vehicles and firearms and higher fines would better deter criminal behavior and reduce dangerous confrontations in remote areas.

Committee members probed how the forfeiture provision would apply to vehicles such as ATVs and quads and asked whether the bill could be tailored to avoid unintended consequences for lawful subsistence gathering. The AG’s office said the definition of motor vehicle varies across statutory sections and offered to provide more precise language.

In the decision session the committee adopted the AG’s recommended changes and made the first offense a fine with forfeiture applied for subsequent offenses, while placing the new penalties in the appropriate forfeiture/penalty chapter. The bill will move forward with those amendments and further technical edits for statutory clarity.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee