Laserfiche WebLink
�J�<r Of <br />COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAII <br />RESOLUTION NO. 22 14 <br />A RESOLUTION ADVISING THE CORPORATION COUNSEL TO APPEAL UNITED <br />STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE BARRY KURREN'S RULING ON ORDINANCE NO. <br />13-121. <br />WHEREAS, the Hawaii County Charter, per Section 6-5.1, provides that the <br />Corporation Counsel is the County's "chief legal advisor and legal representative"; and <br />WHEREAS, the Hawaii County Charter, per Section 3-1, provides that the County <br />Council is charged with "public policy formulation, as distinct and separate from the executive <br />administration of county government"; and <br />WHEREAS, the Corporation Counsel is responsible to the County Council where <br />settlement or litigation becomes an issue, such that the Council is the ultimate decision-making <br />branch of the County when a question concerning an appeal or a settlement versus litigation <br />arises; and <br />WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 13-121 established provisions regulating the open air <br />cultivation, propagation, development, or testing of genetically engineered crops or plants; and <br />WHEREAS, the County's position has been that Ordinance No. 13-121 is not preempted <br />by State or Federal law; and <br />WHEREAS, when asked to opine on whether Ordinance No. 13-121 was preempted by <br />State or Federal law, State Attorney General David Louie took the position that Ordinance No. <br />13-121 is not preempted by State or Federal Law; and <br />WHEREAS, recent attempts to enact State legislation to prohibit County regulation of <br />matters relating to health and agriculture - which would include matters relating to cultivation of <br />genetically engineered crops, have failed; and <br />WHEREAS, in Hawaii Floriculture and Nursery Association, Et Al vs. County of <br />Hawaii, CIV. No. 14-00267 BMK, Magistrate Barry Kurren's found that state law fully <br />preempts County regulation of genetically engineered crops and plants and therefore Ordinance <br />No. 13-121 is illegal <br />WHEREAS, the decision in this case largely relies on the reasoning in Syngenta Seeds, <br />Inc v. County of Kauai, Civil No. 14-00014 (D. Haw. Aug. 25, 2014), and that case is now under <br />appeal by the County of Kauai; and <br />