Sunshine suit on Honua'ula held up

Judge grants 4 months for preparation

The Maui News
Thursday, June 19, 2008
By HARRY EAGAR, Staff Writer

WAILUKU - Second Circuit Judge Joseph Cardoza gave the county and Honua'ula Properties LLC four months to prepare a defense on a lawsuit filed by five Kihei residents against the County Council.

The residents, represented by attorney Lance Collins, had asked for summary judgment against the council for allegedly violating the Sunshine Law by restricting testimony from the public and for backroom negotiations during zoning hearings for the 1,400-unit South Maui development. Cardoza on Wednesday said it was premature to rule on the motion.

Collins asserted that the county has already admitted the facts, so all the judge needs to do is apply the law.

Deputy Corporation Counsel Mary Blaine Johnston denied that the county has admitted to the facts alleged by Collins and told Cardoza there appeared to be a new allegation in the motion for summary judgment that the county had not seen before.

Bill McCorriston, representing Honua'ula, which entered the case as in intervener, said, "We have not admitted anything."

He said the carrying costs for the development run $500,000 a month, so delays are not in Honua'ula's interest. Nevertheless, he argued, his clients need time to investigate the facts.

Johnston said she needed at least two months. Cardoza allowed four, until Oct. 17.

He said ruling on a motion for summary judgment is "like a trial on paper," since he would rely only on submissions from each side, without testimony.

Earlier he had said the plaintiffs had a good chance of prevailing in their arguments.

McCorriston said that even if they do, the law does not automatically void the action taken by the government body that failed to abide by the state's open meeting laws.

Charlie Jencks, the developer's representative, had hinted that Honua'ula might appeal a decision against the county, although the developer is not a named defendant. Cardoza also referred to the possibility of an appeal.

"A very clear record" for the appeal court is important, he said.

The underlying issue "is extremely important," the judge said, because it goes to the "core operations of our government and to the public's rights . . . and, obviously, to the carrying out of the functions of government."