Last year’s heartbreaking disappearance of 6-year-old Isabella Ariel Kalua from her Waimanalo adoptive home, and the outcry from professional advocates and her entire community, demanded a response from lawmakers, at their earliest opportunity.

And they did respond, with House Bill 2424, a measure seeking to reinforce guardrails against the abuse of a child entering the foster program and then moving out of public view with his or her adoption.

Gov. David Ige, who has listed it among bills he could veto by Tuesday, should reconsider that impulse. This is one of several measures that deserve to become law.

HB 2424 would provide the state Department of Human Services’ (DHS) Child Welfare Services branch with needed funds for training and staff. Additionally, it would expand the state’s authority to follow up on an adoption case, under limited circumstances.

Families receiving benefits from the adoption assistance program, and against whom a complaint has been lodged with DHS, would be subject to review. This would not mandate a home visit or preclude child welfare professionals from exercising their judgment, but it would enable some follow-up in cases where there are red flags, made official with a formal complaint.

Ige contended that the added oversight would become too intrusive and disruptive of adoptive family bonds. But this argument seems unfounded: The staff still has the prerogative to weigh whatever warnings have been submitted first.

The governor also raised concerns about amendments made in conference committee without notice, which in general is a valid criticism, noting a legislative process flaw.

However, there would be more harm done by relying on lawmakers to come up with something better next session. Legislation is always a heavy lift, and the fallback option — the status quo — is simply unacceptable.

DHS will be summoned back for a required report on the impact of the reforms so that needed adjustments can be made. In the meantime, the imperative to strengthen Child Welfare Services is clear.

Tuesday’s veto threat hovers over a longer-than-usual list of bills this year, as Ige’s two terms of office near an end. He may be especially sensitive about Senate Bill 3089, which clarifies his own executive authority during a state of emergency as well as that of the county mayors.

Lawmakers watching the pandemic management rightly worry that there were too few boundaries and too much potential for abuse in the future.

The governor should accept that concern and enact SB 3089. The bill would require more clearly defined suspensions of laws and justifications of how the suspensions would protect public health, safety and welfare.

Among their wide-ranging effects, the emergency orders Ige issued curtailed open-records and open-government provisions of the law; at a minimum, these restrictions of public access went on for far too long.

Under SB 3089, the Legislature would have the power to terminate all or part of a declared state of emergency by a two-thirds vote. This sets the hurdle appropriately high for lawmakers, too.

Additional powers are necessary to give the executive branch flexibility when any emergency or disaster presents an imminent danger to the public — but the legislative branch should provide appropriate balance.

Calling attention to other bills on Ige’s intent-to-veto list:

>> Two measures relate to public records. SB 3172 mandates that electronic audio or video documentations taken of board meetings be maintained as records. If this is as burdensome as the governor suggests, the boards could keep written minutes, as they’ve done for many years. And if the board finds it easier to use the alternative option of video or audio recordings, then this is what should be maintained for the public.

>> Another, SB 3252, would cap the fees charged for reproductions of government records, and waive duplication fees for records kept in an electronic format. The governor, already too eager to restrict public access to records during the pandemic, is not acting as an advocate for open government here, either. Rather than argue that fees are needed to deter nuisance requests for records, as Ige does, the assumption should be that document requests are being made in good faith.

>> In contrast, there are the bills that richly deserve a veto. Sounding a last-call to spike some of these: SB 2510, setting a percentage for “firm” energy, and ceilings for the proportion of energy to come from intermittent “green” sources such as solar; HB 1567, seeking to ban the cash-bail system, but in need of more fine-tuning; HB 1570, banning the sale of flavored tobacco products and mislabeled electronic cigarette liquids; and HB 1980, which would discourage telephone appointments as health-care options.

This is Governor Ige’s last time wielding the veto pen before leaving office. As he does so, the voters hope he taps some of what he’s learned in eight years — including the discretion and good judgment this legislation is due.