The Legislature’s interaction with the people it serves has undergone a revolution in the past year. Anyone who has ever sat in on a hearing at the state Capitol knows why access to the building during session was unceremoniously shut to the public the moment the risk of the coronavirus pandemic became clear.

Those windowless hearing rooms have little air circulation, often are packed as tightly as a sardine can — especially for a high-profile issue — and amount to petri dishes for potential spread of COVID-19.

Wisely and for the better part of the last two sessions, access has been through online platforms. Beyond considerations of public health, this virtual approach has opened the discussions to many, including those on neighbor islands, who otherwise would not have their voices heard.

Likely conditions restoring the safety of in-person interactions at the Capitol will be in place well before the start of the next lawmaking session convenes in January 2022.

That will be a welcome and crucial return to normal for those interested in good government, including organizations such as Common Cause Hawaii that advocate for the public interest, because there is no substitute for having the people in the “people’s house.”

Common Cause pushed for online access to the Capitol even before lockdown, said its executive director, Sandy Ma. It was enabled under Gov. David Ige’s emergency powers to this point; fortunately, it seems likely that added option will outlive the pandemic.

Senate Bill 1034, which would authorize in statute the use of “interactive conference technology” for legislative bodies and other government boards, is due this week to come up for a final vote. It deserves the support of every lawmaker, who has seen the practice work well and who should endorse it.

However, as the Legislature moves quickly through its final week toward expected adjournment on Thursday, it’s also time to point out where remote lawmaking falls short.

One point: The Capitol isn’t exactly closed to all. Lobbyists do get called in to meet with lawmakers, said Ma, who is a registered lobbyist herself. There is some rationale for inviting in experts to provide specialized information.

However, lobbyists often represent moneyed interests, and in the absence of public presence, the influence those entities have on legislation can overwhelm the voices of the average taxpayer.

A number of important bills advancing the public interest have advanced. One, House Bill 103, would put additional guardrails on the governor’s emergency proclamation powers. It would clarify, for starters, that no exercise of that power can be inconsistent with the state Constitution, and it would strengthen requirements to justify suspension of any laws.

That’s critical, because at various points in the pandemic, the governor has suspended laws governing open records and meetings. That prerogative, and even the state of emergency itself, can and should have better-defined duration limits.

A long-sought measure to establish automatic voter registration has made it out to a final vote, which merits a sigh of relief from many who wonder why it’s taken so long to take this simple, pro-democracy step.

Overall, these are encouraging moves, particularly in a year when all movement, political or otherwise, has been so constrained. Soon attention should turn to restoring regular public access to the building.

There is nothing that conveys the voters’ reaction to any proposal than seeing them turn out in person and raising their voices. Lawmakers and those they serve do need to see and hear each other, in the same space.