A joint session of the House Committee on Economic Development and the Community, Culture & the Arts Committee took up HCR140/HR134, a resolution urging the Hawaii Sister State Committee to evaluate a sister-state relationship between Hawaii and New Zealand to foster economic, cultural and educational ties.

Dennis Ling of the Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism (DBEDT) told the committees that "New Zealand is not a state. It is a country," and said that an MOU is the practical vehicle for a government-to-government relationship. He cited DBEDT's prior engagement on an MOU with Israel as an example, noting that the Israel MOU covered economic development, trade, education and health and that the governor's office signed that agreement following internal evaluation and community support.

Committee chairs said they would adopt DBEDT's suggested MOU approach for the Hawaii–New Zealand resolution and use the New Zealand terminology "Aotearoa, New Zealand" in the HD1 amendment. The committees clarified they would not proceed under a formal sister-state framework but would pursue the MOU language recommended by DBEDT. DBEDT staff said they do not currently maintain direct governmental contacts in New Zealand and that creating those links would require additional outreach either by the committee or the bill's introducer.

Why it matters: Moving forward with an MOU rather than a sister-state designation clarifies the legal and diplomatic form of Hawaii's intended relationship and frames the effort as economic and cultural cooperation rather than a formal state-to-state pairing.

What happened next: The committee adopted amendments reflecting DBEDT's recommendations and passed HCR140/HR134 with those changes.