COM 0128.081 2010-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Dominic Yagong, Chair Hawai`i County Council October 17, 2011 Page 6 of 9 the same matters should be construed with reference to each other. Richardson v. City and County of Honolulu, 76 Hawai`i 46, 55, 868 P.2d 1193, 1202 (1994) ("Maws in pari materia, or upon the same subject matter, shall be construed with reference to each other. What is clear in one statute may be called in aid to explain what is doubtful in another. "). In this case, HRS § 107 -28 must be read together with HRS § 107 -25. The plain language of HRS § 107 -25 states that, "There is established a state building code applicable to all construction in the State of Hawai`i." See n.2. Here, there is no ambiguity that the State Building Code applies to all construction in the State.3 Because the County is a county within the State, the State Building Code applies to all construction in the County. And, because the State Building Code includes the IBC, all construction in the County is subject to the IBC. This analysis makes sense because of the doctrine of preemption, which is the rule that federal laws will prevail over state laws, and state laws will prevail over local /municipal laws. In general, "a municipal ordinance may be preempted pursuant to HRS § 46- 1.5(13) if (1) it covers the same subject matter embraced within a comprehensive state statutory scheme disclosing an 3 The argument has been raised that HRS § 107 -27(a) implies that the counties are not required to adopt the State Building Code. Specifically, HRS § 107 -27 reads as follows: §107 -27 Exemptions. (a) Upon adoption of rules under this chapter, the design of all state building construction shall be in compliance with the state building code within one year of its effective date, and state building construction shall be allowed to be exempted from: (1) County codes that have not adopted the state building code; (2) Any county code amendments that are inconsistent with the minimum performance objectives of the state building code or the objectives enumerated in this part; or (3) Any county code amendments that are contrary to code amendments adopted by another county. (b) Exemptions shall include county ordinances allowing the exercise of indigenous Hawaiian architecture adopted in accordance with section 46 -1.55. HAW. REV. STAT. § 107 -27 (2007). Although HRS § 107- 27(1)(a) suggests that county building codes need not incorporate and adopt the State Building Code, this notion is only partially correct. As discussed herein, the Council may enact a building code ordinance inconsistent with the State Building Code, but such an ordinance will be preempted by the State Building Code to the extent that it is less restrictive than the State Building Code. See infra, discussion on preemption. Furthermore, as discussed herein, a local /municipal law that has been preempted by a state law is void. Id. Additionally and importantly, HRS § 107 -27 addresses State buildings only and does not apply to constructions owned by either the counties or private persons and entities. Notably, even if it can be argued that HRS § 107 -27 applies to all construction statewide, it is clear that all said construction "shall be in compliance with the state building code ". HAW. REV. STAT. § 107 -27 (2007). Thus, the State Building Code applies to all construction of buildings statewide, whether it be through the preempting of county ordinances or application of HRS § 107 -27. Id.; see also, infra, discussion on preemption.