(The original version of the East Maui item in this article was erroneous and has been rewritten to reflect the fact that the recent appeals dealt with two separate cases. We sincerely apologize for the errors.)
Court Extends Restraining Order
Against Owners of Illegal Seawall
On January 31, 1st Circuit Judge Lisa Cataldo extended a temporary restraining order issued on January 24 preventing Richard and Joann Palmer from conducting any further construction activities on the shoreline, including work on a seawall that had been built earlier that month adjacent to their coastal property in Hauʻula, Oʻahu.
The original TRO was set to expire on February 6, but on January 31, judge Cataldo extended it to March 16. She also rescheduled a planned hearing on the state’s motion for a preliminary injunction and other relief to March 16.
In mid-January, staff with the Department of Land and Natural Resources’ Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands had begun receiving reports that work was occurring makai of the Palmers’ property, “including but not limited to removing rocks from a river spit and shoreline, operation of heavy machinery, and construction of a concrete rubble masonry wall,” according to the state’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
On January 19, OCCL staff saw concrete mix on the Palmers’ property and that a seawall had been built adjacent to it. This despite the fact they had neither requested nor received any permission from the state to build the wall, which is in the Conservation District.
Staff also saw that concrete, wooden two-by-fours, and debris had been left in the Conservation District.
On January 23, The state filed a motion for a TRO, as well as a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief.
The complaint seeks a declaration that the state owns the state land “free and clear of any interest or claim by Defendants.” It also seeks an order preventing the Palmers from maintaining the seawall on state property, ordering the wall and related construction debris be removed in accordance with state requirements, awarding damages to the state for repairing the natural resources affected by their illegal actions, and granting other appropriate relief.
“The unauthorized shoreline structure being illegally installed by Defendants, together with the discarded boulders, concrete, and debris soil on the beach, pose a significant threat to the public, the beach system, and neighboring properties,” a memo supporting the complaint states.
It continues, “The construction Defendants already completed presents a continual trespass onto State land and open and complete defiance of Plaintiff’s rules and authority to manage the conservation district. This prevents Plaintiff from implementing fair management of the area to the immediate and irreparable injury to Plaintiff and the public.”
A&B, Land Board Appeal East Maui Water Judgment,
Sierra Club Appeals Mootness Ruling in Related Case
On February 28, the Board of Land and Natural Resources, Alexander & Baldwin, Inc., and East Maui Irrigation Co, Ltd., filed notices of appeal of a final judgment issued by Environmental Court judge Jeffrey Crabtree on January 29. The case stems from an appeal by the Sierra Club of Hawaiʻi of the board’s renewal of revocable permits that allowed the companies to continue diverting tens of millions of gallons of East Maui stream water through 2023, and the board’s denial of the group’s request for a contested case hearing.
Throughout 2023, Crabtree issued many rulings in that case, including requiring the Land Board to hold a contested case hearing, modifying the cap the board had set on the amount of water the two companies could divert from East Maui streams, ordering the parties to hold discussions with the Maui fire department to discuss the need for East Maui stream water to fight fires, and ordering that the companies pay the Sierra Club’s legal fees and general excise tax.
On February 8, the Sierra Club appealed a ruling by judge Crabtree in a different, but related case. That case involved the Land Board’s contested case decision regarding the companies’ revocable permits for 2021 and 2022. Judge Crabtree ruled last year that the Sierra Club’s appeal of the Land Board’s decision was moot.
— Teresa Dawson
Leave a Reply