Bill to Dissolve Agribusiness Development Corporation Passed Out of House Committee

Hawaii Free Press
News Release from House Democratic Caucus, February 19, 2021 –

Honolulu, Hawaiʻi – A bill to dissolve the Agribusiness Development Corporation (ADC) and transfer all its resource except the director to the Department of Agriculture was passed unamended by the House Agriculture Committee on February 17.

HB 1271 is in response to a devastating audit of the ADC that stated that the company – despite being given a clear mission, broad powers, and millions of dollars over the last 25 years – had failed to promote diversified agriculture that would feed the people of these islands and provide employment after the closure of the sugar plantations. Those findings were reaffirmed in an equally scathing report from the University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO).

The bill was introduced by Representative Amy Perruso with the support of Representatives Jeanné Kapela, Matthew S. LoPresti, Lisa Marten, Richard H.K. Onishi, Adrian K. Tam, Tina Wildberger, Della Au Belatti, and John M. Mizuno.

“I introduced HB1271 because I believe as lawmakers, we have a duty to protect the common good. When problems with governance emerge, despite our best efforts, we are doubly obligated to move swiftly to address the situation by ending the malpractice and charting a better course,” said Rep. Perruso (D-46, Wahiawā, Whitmore Village, Launani Valley). “That’s what HB1271 does. I’m grateful for the support of my colleagues in moving to repeal this bill that created the ADC in the first place.”

Perruso has heard regularly from several small farmers in her district about the difficulties encountered when trying to secure agricultural leases.

“We should be encouraging our small farmers, not putting up roadblocks or refusing to provide transparency as has been the case with the ADC. Importing 90% of our food puts us in a very precarious position. After more than two decades we are still without the plan that the ADC was supposed to develop to address food self-sufficiency. We cannot simply reproduce the status quo as if nothing is wrong with this attached agency,” Perruso said.

State bill would end contested case land use hearings, sending them directly to court

Hawaii Tribune-Herald
By MICHAEL BRESTOVANSKY –

In a supposed effort to streamline the state’s contested case hearing process, a controversial new bill in the state Legislature would end those hearings over land use issues entirely.

Under provisions proposed in House Bill 344, proceedings like the contested case hearing over the development of the Thirty Meter Telescope on Maunakea that stretched for four months between 2016 and 2017 would no longer happen, and would instead be relegated to Circuit Court.

The bill specifically targets language governing the Board of Land and Natural Resources and Commission on Water Resource Management, erasing clauses that allow disputes to be discussed before the board or commission. Those clauses would be replaced with language that allows people who dispute a board or commission action to seek relief “by timely filing a civil action before the circuit court having jurisdiction over the location of the alleged violation.”

According to a report by the House Committee on Water and Land — which voted unanimously in support of the bill on Tuesday — the bill’s intention is to reduce “some of the duplication, uncertainty and costs” associated with holding lengthy land use decision hearings. Other departments, the report went on, would be able to continue to use contested case hearings with no changes.

“The state does a lot of contested case hearings, and a lot of them end up going to court anyway,” said Doug Simons, executive director of the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope. “This would just speed that process along.”

Simons, who last year was one of three candidates identified in the currently suspended search for a new director of the Institute for Astronomy at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, said it is in the best interest of both the public and the state to resolve disputes in a timely manner, rather than through a long contested case hearing that often just ends up getting relegated in the courts anyway.

Simons said the bill is part of a suite of measures in the state Legislature aimed at streamlining the contested case process — House Bill 343 would simplify the process of selecting officers to manage contested case hearings, while House Bill 342 would revise legal definitions related to the process. However, he said, the bills should not change the process too much for members of the public.

“By my understanding, the community can still provide testimony,” Simons said. “I don’t want to inhibit the right of people to testify.”

Among the written testimony submitted at Tuesday’s committee meeting was a statement from UH, which noted the need to mitigate taxpayer costs in light of the ongoing economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, and argued that the measure does not impede public participation.

“The changes proposed by HB 344 do not come at the expense of less public participation, due process or judicial oversight,” UH’s statement read. “The bill leaves intact the right to participate in the agency decision-making processes under the Sunshine Law at open public meetings. The bill leaves intact public hearing requirements for certain discretionary permits and approvals … so that the public will have an opportunity to present information and views on the record. And finally, the bill leaves fully intact appeals through the Hawaii Judiciary.”

Other organizations, including the Maunakea Observatories and the Hawaii Island Chamber of Commerce, echoed UH’s statement Tuesday, as did Roberta Chu, a former member of UH’s Maunakea Management Board who testified as a private citizen.

“Contested cases hold up land use decisions across the state which create unpredictability in projects that could deter investors,” Chu wrote. “The economic impact of potentially numerous contested cases has the probability of making investment in Hawaii non-existent. The contested case option should be left to the court system.”

“This legislation is crucial for the Maunakea Observatories given that future land authorization for the Maunakea Science Reserve may be subject to a contested case, introducing lengthy delays in the land authorization process,” read a letter by the Maunakea Observatories. “It is in the interests of the State, Federal sponsors, Maunakea Observatories, and broader community to have timely and complete resolution of land use decisions that may arise in the MKSR land authorization.”

Others do not feel the same, however. Opponents of TMT who were involved in the 2016 contested case hearing believe HB 344 is a clear violation of due process and removes a way for members of the public to have their voices heard.

“It’s trying to eliminate any kind of public participation,” said cultural practitioner E. Kalani Flores, who participated in the 2016 hearing and other legal challenges against TMT. “The purpose of a contested case hearing is so we can provide the people making decisions with the information they need.”

Flores said that if the 2016 hearing had gone straight to Circuit Court rather than the initial contested case hearing, then far fewer members of the public would have been able to participate, purely because of the financial costs of hiring legal representation.

That sentiment was shared by Henry Curtis, executive director of environmental action group Life of the Land, who submitted testimony opposing the measure to Tuesday’s House Committee meeting.

“HB 344 appears to say that if an agency fails to do its job in protecting public trust resources, rather than filing a contested case proceeding, one must hire a lawyer and clog up the courts,” Curtis’ statement read. “As for those without abundant funds, tough noodles.”

The committee report acknowledged the due process concerns, and requested that future committees consider the possibility of allowing the BLNR to conduct contested case hearings “in certain circumstances.”

Noe Noe Wong-Wilson, a leader of the group opposing TMT construction, said the fact that the bill applies only to land and water disputes is telling.

“If they’re trying to speed things up, why not get rid of it in all cases?” Wong-Wilson said. “It looks like it’s just here to push through development on Maunakea and elsewhere.”

Flores said he finds it ironic that this bill would abolish certain contested case hearings for the sake of efficiency, while three other bills also active in the state legislature — HB 972, SB 1126 and SB 873 — seek to improve the process by legalizing the use of interactive conference technologies like Zoom, which would make the process accessible to more people.

Representatives of the Department of Land and Natural Resources declined to comment on pending legislation. However, DLNR chair Suzanne Case submitted testimony Tuesday, saying the department supports the measure because it would relieve the board of the burden of managing an increasing number of complex contested cases whose efficacy “is unclear especially since important and complex contested cases generally are ultimately referred to the Judiciary anyway.”

The bill passed second reading in the house Friday, with only three representatives voting against it.

Lawmakers Must Fix The Agribusiness Development Corporation

Civil Beat

Two new reports reveal that the government agency has failed miserably in its critical mission to diversify ag.

By Civil Beat Editorial Board

In 1992 Dole Food ended pineapple production on Lanai. Just two years later, Hilo Coast Processing shuttered its sugar operations for good, as did Hamakua Sugar, both on the Big Island.

The year 1994 was, not coincidentally, the year the Hawaii Legislature created the Agribusiness Development Corp. to “facilitate the transition of agricultural infrastructure from plantation operations into other agricultural enterprises,” as Act 264 stated.

The ADC’s work would involve analyzing marketing approaches and providing leadership “for the development, financing, improvement, or enhancement of agricultural enterprises.”

The Legislature gave it wide latitude, exempting it from public land trust regulations and from Public Utilities Commission regulations and civil service laws.

ADC’s mission soon grew even more urgent. Beginning in 1995 with the closure of Oahu Sugar and continuing to 2016 when Maui’s Hawaii Commercial and Sugar Company closed — the end of King Sugar — more than a half-dozen more large-scale ag operations folded. (Some pineapple is still grown locally.)

But, even though the trend was painfully obvious and thousands of people were losing jobs, ADC was slow to act.

It wasn’t until 2003 that it assumed management of the Kekaha Sugar operation (which halted for good in 2000) and not until 2012 that it made its first land purchase (1,227 acres of former pineapple plantation lands in Wahiawa owned by the George Galbraith Estate). And it wasn’t until 2017 that ADC issued its first license for those lands.

Indeed, the Agribusiness Development Corp. has transformed into an organization that mainly purchases farm land but does little with it.

Today, 27 years after its founding, the ADC has not become “the entity the Legislature envisioned,” one that would develop an agriculture industry “to stand as a pillar” of the state economy alongside tourism and the military, according to the audit, which is rightly described in news reports as “scathing.”

Instead, it has been a complete “fiasco,” in the words of a University of Hawaii economist.

The one-two punch of the state audit and the UHERO analysis, both released last month and both coming at a time when the state is hungry for new revenue sources in the wake of the novel coronavirus calamity, is a serious wake-up call.

The responsibility for the ADC’s failure falls to the agency’s leadership, of course, but mostly with the organization that created it: the Legislature. They made it; they own it.

It’s encouraging that House Speaker Scott Saiki and Senate President Ron Kouchi are troubled by the reports. Saiki, who has promised a public hearing on the ADC, described the agency as “dysfunctional,” which is an understatement.

We are worried, though, that this may become less of a concern as the Legislature continues its 2021 session restricted by deep budget deficits. Will the end result be yet another task force to study the issue?

The ADC itself seems resistant to change, with Executive Director Jimmy Nakatani previously claiming it could not be bothered to get audited because it was “too busy.”

Too busy doing too little, it seems. Nakatani himself is quoted in the audit as saying, “No one here has a deep agricultural background.”

But there is more good news amidst these shameful findings: Other legislators are already working on constructive plans for the ADC.

Sen. Mike Gabbard, chair of the Agriculture and Environment Committee, has scheduled a hearing next week on his bill to require the corporation to annually lease at least 50% of its land to businesses primarily focused on local food production. The bill notes that the ADC manages over 22,000 acres of public agricultural lands “with significant potential to shape” the state’s goal of greater food self-sufficiency.

That’s an idea that deserves attention. As Civil Beat’s new series, Home Grown, points out, Hawaii imports more than 80% of what we eat.

We are pleased as well to see that Gabbard’s House counterpart, Rep. Mark Hashem, has authored a companion bill to Gabbard’s. Both also require the ADC and the Department of Agriculture to submit reports to the Legislature on leasing activities. (Hopefully, Mr. Nakatani can make the time.)

Even if the bill passes, we are a long way from true diversification, let alone returning ag to its premier status as an economic driver. Seed crops, coffee, cattle, macadamia nuts, aquaculture, papayas, bananas and other island agricultural commodities generate around $400 million of revenue a year of the state’s total GDP of $97 billion in 2019 — that is, pre-COVID-19.

But agriculture must be a part of our economic future. If the ADC is to play a role, lawmakers would do well to review the 28 recommendations in the auditor’s report, including the first one:

“Update and revise its mission statement to reflect the corporation’s purpose more completely as intended by the Legislature to address, among other things, facilitating the development of Hawaii-based agricultural enterprises and strategies to promote, market, and distribute Hawaii-grown agricultural crops and value-added products in local, national, and international markets.”

Barring that, lawmakers should take a look at another proposed bill this session, one that references the auditor’s report directly: Dissolve the ADC and transfer all lands and staff — “except for the executive director” — to the Department of Agriculture.

Contact Key Lawmakers
Senate President Ron Kouchi
senkouchi@capitol.hawaii.gov
808-586-6030

House Speaker Scott Saiki
repsaiki@capitol.hawaii.gov
808-586-6100

Hawaii State Legislature HB1271 – Agribusiness Development Corporation; Department of Agriculture; Repeal

Measure Status HB1271
Measure Title: RELATING TO THE AGRIBUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. –
Report Title: Agribusiness Development Corporation; Department of Agriculture; Repeal
Description: Dissolves the agribusiness development corporation and transfers all lands and staff, except for the executive director, to the department of agriculture.
Companion:
Package: None
Current Referral: AGR, FIN
Introducer(s): PERRUSO, KAPELA, LOPRESTI, MARTEN, ONISHI, TAM, WILDBERGER, Belatti, Mizuno

Sort by Date Status Text
1/27/2021 H Introduced and Pass First Reading.
2/1/2021 H Referred to AGR, FIN, referral sheet 3

S = Senate | H = House | D = Data Systems | $ = Appropriation measure | ConAm = Constitutional Amendment

Hawaii State Legislature HB827 – Measure Title: RELATING TO AGRICULTURE

Measure Status – HB827
Report Title: Department of Agriculture; Agribusiness Development Corporation; Diversified Agriculture; Leased Lands; Reporting Requirements; Local Food Production; Enterprise –
Description: Requires the Department of Agriculture and Agribusiness Development Corporation to annually lease at least fifty per cent of land leased or up for lease renewal to operations whose primary business is local food production beginning 1/1/2022. Requires the Department of Agriculture and Agribusiness Development Corporation to submit reports to the legislature on leasing activities. –
Companion: SB335
Package: None
Current Referral: AGR, FIN
Introducer(s): HASHEM, BRANCO, DECOITE, HASHIMOTO, ICHIYAMA, KAPELA, LOWEN, MCKELVEY, MIZUNO, MORIKAWA, NAKASHIMA, ONISHI, PERRUSO, TARNAS

Sort by Date Status Text
1/25/2021 H Pending introduction.
1/27/2021 H Introduced and Pass First Reading.
1/29/2021 H Referred to AGR, FIN, referral sheet 2

S = Senate | H = House | D = Data Systems | $ = Appropriation measure | ConAm = Constitutional Amendment

Rep. Ed Case’s bills take aim at reforming Jones Act

Star-Advertiser

U.S. Rep. Ed Case of Hawaii said today he has reintroduced three bills in Congress to reform the Jones Act, which many critics say is responsible for artificially inflating the cost of shipping goods to the state.

“These three bills are meant to end a century of monopolistic closed market domestic cargo shipping to and from my isolated home state of Hawai‘i as well as the other island and separated jurisdictions of our country that lie outside the continental United States,” Case said. “The bills aim directly at one of the key drivers of our astronomically high cost of living in Hawai‘i and other similarly located jurisdictions.”

Case said because the Jones Act severely limits the supply of shipping to and from Hawaii’s communities, it has allowed a few companies to control the state’s lifeline to the outside world and, as a result, “command shipping rates way higher than the rest of the world.”

The 1920 Jones Act requires all cargo moved between two U.S. ports to be carried by vessels that are built in the country, owned by a U.S. entity and manned by an American crew.

Kahele: Neighbor Islands won’t get overlooked

Maui News
Kehaulani Cerizo –

New rep-elect heads to Congress for freshman term

After traveling thousands of miles from his native Hilo, Kai Kahele is immersed in the Washington, D.C., bustle, making preparations for his freshman term as U.S. representative.

Office selections. Loads of paperwork. Hours of training.

All the while at the nation’s capital, Kahele is seeking to maintain a pulse on Hawaii’s needs. He assured smaller Neighbor Island communities that once he’s in Congress in January, they won’t get lost in the fray.

“I understand the challenges of living on the Neighbor Island — every aspect of it — from education to health care to kupuna care to social services,” Kahele told the The Maui News in a phone interview on Wednesday. “And as a result, I can be that very important voice for the delegation and what the delegation needs.”

Kahele, who’s spent most of his life on the Big Island, discussed ways he’d like to get COVID-19 relief funds directly to county municipalities so they don’t have to ask Gov. David Ige for a “piece of the pie.” He touched on the balance of reopening tourism and public safety and also detailed goals for Maui County, such as building a long-awaited veterans center and funneling money toward agriculture.

With the CARES Act expiring soon, state leaders have been mulling ways to secure additional COVID-19 relief money as Maui County buckles under some of the highest unemployment rates in the nation.

Kahele pointed out that the U.S. House passed a Heroes Act, a second stimulus funding piece for the country. The bill would provide nearly a half billion dollars for direct payment stimulus checks for those who qualify, additional money for the unemployed, more Paycheck Protection Program funding for small businesses and an infusion of rent relief funding.

“The money would go from the federal government direct to Mayor Victorino and the County of Maui to be dispersed rather than having to go to the state government, Governor Ige, who would then decide,” Kahele said.

However, the proposal is sitting in the U.S. Senate, without debate or a floor vote, he said, adding that he will be pushing for these funds.

When it comes to the tension between reopening and public safety, Kahele said it’s a “delicate balance” that involves “tough decisions.”

Neighbor Islands have been reeling over the lack of tourism dollars, more so than Oahu, which is also bolstered by government and military sectors.

Kahele said there is no perfect plan, and at some point a certain level of risk must be accepted when reopening the counties and the economy.

“Difficult decisions have to be made because tourism is such a big part of our economy,” he said. “I mean, we are not going to diversify our economy away from tourism overnight. It’s going to take a significant amount of time, a significant amount of resources. It’s going to take years to do that.”

To mitigate reopening risks, testing, adequate medical facilities, opportunities for people to quarantine and a thorough contract tracing program are needed, he said.

First and foremost, it’s the responsibility of leaders to protect their people and prioritize residents’ health, safety and welfare, Kahele added. Because the economy is so reliant on tourism, tough choices need to be made to reopen safely, he said.

Beyond COVID-19, Kahele outlined goals for Maui County. He said breaking ground on a veterans center for Maui is among his top priorities. The center has been in the works for over a decade, and a Central Maui site has been selected, but the project continues to stall.

“After years of talk and all these great headlines, we still don’t have a building and a facility,” he said.

With almost 10,000 veterans throughout the state, Maui County veterans, including those on Lanai and Molokai, need a place to get adequate health care, he said.

“That’s something our country owes our veterans who have given a very large part of their lives, and the lives of their families, their spouses and their children,” said Kahele, who’s also a service member. “That’s an obligation our country has to our veterans.”

Kahele said he’s currently getting briefed on the project and what’s needed to get it “shovel ready.” He hopes to get it done during his first term.

Also, Kahele said Maui and Hawaii islands produce 98 percent of the state’s agriculture and that he’s looking forward to serving on a committee on agriculture. He said Maui’s under-utilized lands can be cultivated for ag, and he aims to procure funds to support local farmers, subsidize startup operations and invest in water delivery systems.

The young leader has plenty of work ahead, especially during one of the most politically divided times in recent history. Kahele, a 46-year-old Democrat, said he will work to build bridges, something 21 years in the military has instilled in him.

“I’ve served side-by-side with active duty and Guard and reserve, military members who may have disagreed on many different things, philosophically and morally, but we knew how to get the job done, and we were able to put the mission first and to do that,” he said. “And that’s what I think we need here in Washington, D.C., is individuals that are servant leaders, are here for the right reasons and are here to get things done rather than fight and, you know, get separated into our different tribes.”

Kahele, a Hawaiian Airlines pilot and member of the Hawaii Air National Guard, entered politics in 2016. Ige appointed him to the Hawaii State Senate to finish the term of his father, Gil Kahele, who died unexpectedly after a heart attack.

In January 2019, Kahele announced his bid for Hawaii’s 2nd Congressional District, representing all rural and most suburban areas of Oahu/Honolulu County, along with Kauai, Maui, Kalawao and Hawaii counties.

He won handily to succeed U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who ran unsuccessfully for president and said in October 2019 that she would not seek re-election.

Once he takes office, Kahele will be the second Native Hawaiian to serve in Congress since statehood. U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka, who died in 2016, was the first.

“I’m also looking forward to being the second Native Hawaiian since statehood to represent Hawaii,” he said. “I feel like I can be a voice for Native Hawaiians in the United States Congress.”

Hawaii Agriculture Employee Definitons

?387-1 Definitions. As used in this chapter:

?Agriculture? means agriculture as defined in section 3(f) of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, or as the same may be amended from time to time.

?Department? means the department of labor and industrial relations.

?Director? means the director of labor and industrial relations.

?Employ? includes to permit or suffer to work.

?Employee? includes any individual employed by an employer, but shall not include any individual employed:

(1) At a guaranteed compensation totaling $2,000 or more a month, whether paid weekly, biweekly, or monthly;

(2) In agriculture for any workweek in which the employer of the individual employs less than twenty employees or in agriculture for any workweek in which the individual is engaged in coffee harvesting;

Electronic File Date: 11/14/2006

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol07_Ch0346-0398/HRS0387/HRS_0387-0001.htm

Hawaii-grown roasted or instant coffee; labeling requirements

?486-120.6 Hawaii-grown roasted or instant coffee; labeling requirements.
Electronic File Date: 11/14/2006
(a) In addition to all other labeling requirements, the identity statement used for labeling or advertising roasted or instant coffee produced in whole or in part from Hawaii-grown green coffee beans shall meet the following requirements:

(1) For roasted or instant coffee that contains one hundred per cent Hawaii-grown coffee by weight the identity statement shall consist of either:

(A) The geographic origin of the Hawaii-grown coffee, in coffee consisting of beans from only one geographic origin, followed by the word ?Coffee?; provided that the geographic origin may be immediately preceded by the term ?100%?; or

(B) The per cent coffee by weight of one of the Hawaii-grown coffees, used in coffee consisting of beans from several geographic origins, followed by the geographic origin of the weight-specified coffee and the terms ?Coffee? and ?All Hawaiian?;

(2) For roasted or instant coffee consisting of a blend of one or more Hawaii-grown coffees and coffee not grown in Hawaii, the per cent coffee by weight of one of the Hawaii-grown coffees used in the blend, followed by the geographic origin of the weight-specified coffee and the term ?Coffee Blend?; and

(3) Each word or character in the identity statement shall be of the same type size and shall be contiguous. The smallest letter or character of the identity statement on packages of sixteen ounces or less net weight shall be at least one and one-half times the type size required under federal law for the statement of net weight or three-sixteenths of an inch in height, whichever is smaller. The smallest letter or character of the identity statement on packages of greater than sixteen ounces net weight shall be at least one and one-half times the type size required under federal law for the statement of net weight. The identity statement shall be conspicuously displayed without any intervening material in a position above the statement of net weight. Upper and lower case letters may be used interchangeably in the identity statement.

(b) A listing of the geographic origins of the various Hawaii-grown coffees and the regional origins of the various coffees not grown in Hawaii that are included in a blend may be shown on the label. If used, this list shall consist of the term ?Contains:?, followed by, in descending order of per cent by weight and separated by commas, the respective geographic origin or regional origin of the various coffees in the blend that the manufacturer chooses to list. Each geographic origin or regional origin may be preceded by the per cent of coffee by weight represented by that geographic origin or regional origin, expressed as a number followed by the per cent sign. The type size used for this list shall not exceed half that of the identity statement. This list shall appear below the identity statement, if included on the front panel of the label.

(c) It shall be a violation of this section:

(1) To use the identity statement specified in subsection (a)(1)(A) or similar terms in labeling or advertising unless the package of roasted or instant coffee contains one hundred per cent coffee from that one geographic origin;

(2) To use a geographic origin in labeling or advertising, including in conjunction with a coffee style or in any other manner, if the roasted or instant coffee contains less than ten per cent coffee by weight from that geographic origin;

(3) To use a geographic origin in advertising roasted or instant coffee, including advertising in conjunction with a coffee style or in any other manner, without disclosing the percentage of coffee used from that geographic origin as described in subsection (a)(1)(B) and [(a)](2);

(4) To use a geographic origin in labeling or advertising roasted or instant coffee, including in conjunction with a coffee style or in any other manner, if the green coffee beans used in that roasted or instant coffee do not meet the grade standard requirements of rules adopted under chapter 147;

(5) To misrepresent, on a label or in advertising of a roasted or instant coffee, the per cent coffee by weight of any coffee from a geographic origin or regional origin; or

(6) To use the term ?All Hawaiian? on a label or in advertising of a roasted or instant coffee if the roasted or instant coffee is not produced entirely from green coffee beans produced in geographic origins defined in this chapter.

(d) Roasters, manufacturers, or other persons who package roasted or instant coffee covered by this section shall maintain, for a period of two years, records on the volume and geographic origin or regional origin of coffees purchased and sold and any other records required by the department for the purpose of enforcing this section. Authorized employees of the department shall have access to these records during normal business hours.

(e) For the purpose of this section:

?Geographic origin? means the geographic regions in which Hawaii-grown green coffee beans are produced, as defined in rules adopted under chapter 147; provided that the term ?Hawaiian? may be substituted for the geographic origin ?Hawaii?.

?Per cent coffee by weight? means the percentage calculated by dividing the weight in pounds of roasted green coffee beans of one geographic or regional origin used in a production run of roasted or instant coffee, by the total weight in pounds of the roasted green coffee beans used in that production run of roasted or instant coffee, and multiplying the quotient by one hundred. [L 1991, c 289, ?2; am L 1995, c 103, ?1; am L 2002, c 258, ?1]

?486-121 Misrepresentation of quantity. No person shall:

(1) Sell, offer, or expose for sale less than the quantity -represented;

(2) Take any more than the quantity represented when the buyer furnishes the weight or measure by means of which the quantity is determined; or

(3) Represent the quantity in any manner calculated to mislead or in any way deceive another person. [L 1991, c 153, pt of ?6; am L 1993, c 54, ?12]

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol11_Ch0476-0490/HRS0486/HRS_0486-0120_0006.htm