2024-04-02 PL-CCI-2024-000003 Bill 121 Claudia Rohr Testimony

Home

Case 1:22-cv-00247-DKW-RT Document 85 Filed 12/21/23 Page 24 of 28 PagelD.3084 has necessarily also shown that there is a lack of adequate remedies at law. Arizona Dream Act Coal. v. Brewer, 855 F.3d 957 (9th Cir. 2017). Finally, because the government is a party, the Court's consideration of the balance of hardships and the public interest merge. Nken, 556 U.S. at 435. Here, the Court finds that after weighing the balance of hardships, an equitable remedy is warranted and would serve the public interest. The Ninth Circuit has explained, "it is clear that it would not be equitable or in the public's interest to allow the state . . to violate the requirements of federal law, especially when there are no adequate remedies available." Valle del Sol, 732 F.3d at 1029. By that same reasoning, it would be neither equitable, nor in the public's interest, to permit the City to enforce an ordinance which violates the requirements of state law.17 Conversely, there is no harm in compelling the City to comply with the statute that is the very source of its ability to legislate. The public interest and balance of equities favor granting a permanent injunction. 17The Court further notes that a permanent injunction merely prohibits the City from enforcing Ordinance 22-7 insofar as it fails to establish a process to protect nonconforming uses. The City is more than capable of establishing such protections. See, e.g., Stip. Facts at¶¶ 58, 60 (establishing, in Ordinance 89-154, a system of nonconforming use certificates for existing rentals of less than 30 days); Kauai County Code § 8-17.10(a) (creating a nonconforming use certificate program for existing short term vacation rentals following a 2008 zoning amendment); Hawaii County Code § 25-4-16.1 (establishing the same following a 2019 zoning amendment). - 24 -