-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Hawaii - 2019 Legislative Session - EV Related Bills
- Thread starter nanimac
- Start date
FYI. All these bills have passed the 3rd Senate hearings and are moving on to the House.
S657 Measure Status
SB1000 Measure Status
SB653 Measure Status
SB409 Measure Status
SB438 Measure Status
S657 Measure Status
SB1000 Measure Status
SB653 Measure Status
SB409 Measure Status
SB438 Measure Status
First House hearing on SB657 which extends sunset to 2023 and limits free non-metered parking (i.e. Airport) on 3/14/19 @ 8:35AM. Testimony needed again by 3/13/19 @ 8:35am
Measure Status
Hearing EEP 03-14-19.
Measure Status
Hearing EEP 03-14-19.
Bill was deferred yesterday by The House Committees on Energy and Environmental Protection
thetravelingdr
Member
Lol so what does that mean? Everything stays as is until they "un-defer" it or bring it back up for consideration?Bill was deferred yesterday by The House Committees on Energy and Environmental Protection
Akikiki
A'-Lo-HA ! y'all
Deferred means the chairperson of the named committees don't want to move the bill forward yet. If it doesn't move by the next "decking" deadline, it's dead. Committee chairs will use deferrals to allow more time for opposing sides to discuss controversial issues and come to a resolution that can then be adopted into an amendment to a bill. Chairs also use deferral as a means to avoid moving a bill that has support forward if they are personally against it.
Unfortunately, there are no legislative rules that force committee chairs to hear and take action on every bill that gets referred to their committee. In this way, a one-person committee chair can effectively "kill" a bill regardless of how much support it may have from the other committee members or the rest of the legislature. The chair can be pressured by their constituents or fellow committee members, but ultimately, the decision to hear or take action on a bill resides with the chairperson of the committee.
Unfortunately, there are no legislative rules that force committee chairs to hear and take action on every bill that gets referred to their committee. In this way, a one-person committee chair can effectively "kill" a bill regardless of how much support it may have from the other committee members or the rest of the legislature. The chair can be pressured by their constituents or fellow committee members, but ultimately, the decision to hear or take action on a bill resides with the chairperson of the committee.
thetravelingdr
Member
EVs costing state millions, blamed for airport parking congestion
Front page news report out now. Will be interesting to see how this goes. If it died this legislative session, when can it come up again? I'm assuming it will keep coming up again and again until SOME formulation of this bill passes eventually. Three points I want to bring up, albeit from my biased "Would be nice to keep my free EV airport parking benefit" point of view:
1) If it's true that airport parking workers who wouldn't normally be able to park at work are using it for parking, why should the rest of the EV-using state get blamed? Although that honestly does suck if the workers are working at the airport and don't have/never have had an easier way to park close to the work. Not sure what the solution to that is.
2) Once the new parking structures get up and are opened (I think that's what's being built in the renovation of the airport, what I see every time I drive into the airport), ideally the parking pressure would dissipate a bit for everyone? Just a bit of wishful thinking
3) It's annoying, and poor news reporting, that the Hawaii News Now report failed at the following things:
a) Didn't mention anything about the fact that this is Spring Break, and almost always a ridiculously hard time to park at the airport regardless of the EV benefit or not
b) Made zero distinction/didn't bring up the idea that hybrid vehicles are not 100% EV. My guess is of the 550 cars parked a vast percentage were hybrids/Pruises or something not 100% EV, and not all Leafs/Teslas/Volts. Just a guess, but a fairly good one I would think. If all those hybrids were taken out of the equation, it wouldn't be that bad.
c) Completely got the amount of time allowed wrong...3 months free is WAY different than 1 month free and sounds way worse (SIDE NOTE: I think some compromise btw 4 hours and 1 month would be an acceptable compromise for most EV users for future bills, as an alternative parking benefit. May I suggest 1-2 weeks? Or ANYTHING longer than a day would be a decent incentive to encourage EV ownership)
Inevitably these benefits will be reined in, not just the airport parking but any free metered parking. The $1 million dollar question is: How soon and by how much, and how do you do it fairly/how do you replace it with something that still encourages adoption of clean energy alternatives?
Front page news report out now. Will be interesting to see how this goes. If it died this legislative session, when can it come up again? I'm assuming it will keep coming up again and again until SOME formulation of this bill passes eventually. Three points I want to bring up, albeit from my biased "Would be nice to keep my free EV airport parking benefit" point of view:
1) If it's true that airport parking workers who wouldn't normally be able to park at work are using it for parking, why should the rest of the EV-using state get blamed? Although that honestly does suck if the workers are working at the airport and don't have/never have had an easier way to park close to the work. Not sure what the solution to that is.
2) Once the new parking structures get up and are opened (I think that's what's being built in the renovation of the airport, what I see every time I drive into the airport), ideally the parking pressure would dissipate a bit for everyone? Just a bit of wishful thinking
3) It's annoying, and poor news reporting, that the Hawaii News Now report failed at the following things:
a) Didn't mention anything about the fact that this is Spring Break, and almost always a ridiculously hard time to park at the airport regardless of the EV benefit or not
b) Made zero distinction/didn't bring up the idea that hybrid vehicles are not 100% EV. My guess is of the 550 cars parked a vast percentage were hybrids/Pruises or something not 100% EV, and not all Leafs/Teslas/Volts. Just a guess, but a fairly good one I would think. If all those hybrids were taken out of the equation, it wouldn't be that bad.
c) Completely got the amount of time allowed wrong...3 months free is WAY different than 1 month free and sounds way worse (SIDE NOTE: I think some compromise btw 4 hours and 1 month would be an acceptable compromise for most EV users for future bills, as an alternative parking benefit. May I suggest 1-2 weeks? Or ANYTHING longer than a day would be a decent incentive to encourage EV ownership)
Inevitably these benefits will be reined in, not just the airport parking but any free metered parking. The $1 million dollar question is: How soon and by how much, and how do you do it fairly/how do you replace it with something that still encourages adoption of clean energy alternatives?
It is annoying that the State is so two-sided. They want 100% clean transportation by 2045 yet they are blaming EVs for lost revenue at the airport and now less revenue to fix/maintain roads. The EV registration bill SB 409 now takes out plug in hybrids and leaves the amount charged blank. If the media would only take time to read testimony submitted by EV Owners to get the other viewpoint instead of always trying to sensationalize things, that would be better reporting. But I know that’s far from reality nowadays!
The media also missed that the bill would’ve extended the EV benefit sunset which is something needed to help fuel more EV growth.
Bills that are still pending at the end of session in an odd-numbered year (this year) automatically carry over and retain their same bill number and status into the following year. If not passed by the 2nd (even) year, it's dead and must be re-introduced
https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/docs/CitizensGuide.pdf
https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/docs/CitizensGuide.pdf
Akikiki
A'-Lo-HA ! y'all
Yes at least they mention other factors. Did anyone notice the number of parking spaces is 4500? When was the last time anyone parked on the Diamond Head side of the main parking lot? Its been years. Those spaces were taken away everyone and are used for rental cars while the rental car dedicated parking lot is being built. That's half of the main parking lot that we have no access to.
A couple of weeks ago I drove through all three parking structures looking for Teslas to count for our list. I found 84 Teslas with a rear tag and another 12-15+ with paper tags. I didn't count non-Teslas and hybrids. But there were hundreds. A recent article and TV news report put a recent count a 550 total. I would not argue against that. There easily could have been that many.
And the airport authority is also finishing up adding solar panels to the top levels of the parking structures. Used to be the top level on each was too hot and was always empty. These days, the upper level spaces are all covered with the solar panel canopy and there were only a few spaces not taken.
Akikiki
A'-Lo-HA ! y'all
It is annoying that the State is so two-sided. They want 100% clean transportation by 2045 yet they are blaming EVs for lost revenue at the airport and now less revenue to fix/maintain roads. The EV registration bill SB 409 now takes out plug in hybrids and leaves the amount charged blank. If the media would only take time to read testimony submitted by EV Owners to get the other viewpoint instead of always trying to sensationalize things, that would be better reporting. But I know that’s far from reality nowadays!
The media also missed that the bill would’ve extended the EV benefit sunset which is something needed to help fuel more EV growth.
Odd is it not how they are beating up on EV owners for using a benefit that the government granted us when they wanted to induce us to help them meet their goals.
Two sided is correct. State legislature passed laws that allows us and they encouraged the use. Then DAGS, Dept of Accounting and General Services complains to the legislature that DAGS is losing revenue because we use the law.
And now they want to cast blame on EV owners as being equally responsible for the drop in gas tax revenue. EVs account for only 1% of all the vehicles on state/city roads, but we are causing the decrease in revenue. Funny how they have forgotten that more efficient ICE have been around since the 60’s with Hondas, Nissans, and Toyotas. It’s not a new thing for more gasoline efficient to be here, yet suddenly it’s a crisis.
While all this negative attention that is being brought upon EVs is frustrating, it is also an eye-opener about how EV ignorant our politicians and the general public are. Am taking a deep breath (after venting) and think about ways to educate the public about the positive things about EVs and what clean transportation can do to help keep our islands beautiful for decades for come.
SB 409 SD2 HD1 is being heard tomorrow afternoon by the House Committee on Finance. The hearing notice can be found here.
This bill would establish an incremental registration fee on EVs and alternative fuel vehicles. The proposed fee previously was $15 and now is blanked out when the bill was amended, so unclear where it may end up. Additionally, the bill was amended to remove hybrids from being subject to the fee. Seems like EVs are getting singled out when there just aren't enough (1% of all vehicles) to make even a nominal difference in revenues.
Testimony is needed by this afternoon if possible or at least submitted late before the hearing starts.
This bill would establish an incremental registration fee on EVs and alternative fuel vehicles. The proposed fee previously was $15 and now is blanked out when the bill was amended, so unclear where it may end up. Additionally, the bill was amended to remove hybrids from being subject to the fee. Seems like EVs are getting singled out when there just aren't enough (1% of all vehicles) to make even a nominal difference in revenues.
Testimony is needed by this afternoon if possible or at least submitted late before the hearing starts.
I submitted my testimony. Told them to extract money from citizens with gas taxes as usual . That they would still retain their votes anyway as most voters are clueless and keep voting for the same Statists that tax and spend with Reckless abandon and wonder why it's so expensive to live in Hawaii.
This summarizes how much our elected officials care about climate change...get ready to pay $50 more in registration fees because you own an EV and you are ruining our roadways. Or contact Governor Ige to ask him to veto SB409.
Dozens Of Climate Change Bills Went Down The Political Drain This…
Dozens Of Climate Change Bills Went Down The Political Drain This…
Thanks for keeping us up to date on the EV laws amd and regulations.
Similar threads
