2023-11-09 Request for Reconsideration for Subpoena Duces Tecum

Home

c. Their second and third paragraphs outlining their request - copies of past and present policies and all decisions on agricultural exemptions from 2022-present - are beyond the scope of what the BOA has the authority to grant a subpoena request for. The Board of Appeals has the authority to grant subpoenas for all relevant information. DPW's policies applicable to the denial and other grants/denials from the contemporaneous period are relevant to the issue on appeal, which is whether DPW's denial of Appellant's permit was made in error or arbitrarily. However, if the Board does not feel that certain requests are relevant, then Appellant respectfully requests that the Board issue a subpoena for the remaining categories, at minimum. 2. They seem to be basically objecting to DPW's ROA & should file their objection as such. The deadline was provided in the Scheduling Order. Appellant filed an objection to the ROA on November 8. As set forth in the objection, DPW has not filed a ROA, and so Appellant has not been provided with any files. Given the lack of a ROA, Appellant respectfully requests that the Board allow Appellant to gain access to DPW's files through the subpoena. 3. As a note, in the Kai LLC case, one of the exhibits Kai LLC had was a formal request they sent to DPW & in response, DPW furnished all emails and internal correspondence that was related to their project/TM K as it related to the specific permit#'s they were referencing with-in their appeal. The BOA has no authority to tell the Department to provide a general list of documents that may or may not be within their possession that has no relation to the specific matter before us. We are not the entity to determine the completeness, or lack thereof, of any generalized document request. The requested subpoena would allow Appellant to work with DPW to gather emails/internal correspondence related to the project. In other words, the subpoena is a "formal request" like the one referenced in the Kai LLC case, which is specifically allowed under Hawaii law and the BOA Rules. What appears more appropriate for them is that they can go through the official legal route of a UIPA and make their request directly to the Department. The BOA cannot grant this type of request as we do not have the jurisdiction in which to do so. The request is DENIED. UIPA is a procedure that exists to allow the general public to access government files and "enhance governmental accountability," through "a general policy of access to government records." Peer News LLC v. City& Cnty. of Honolulu, 143 Haw. 472, 479-80, 431 P.3d 1245, 1252-53 (2018). Although UIPA is a great tool, it is designed for the general public to access information of public interest; it is not designed for parties that need access to information to be able to put on evidence in a contested case hearing affecting their substantive rights. For parties to a contested case such as Appellant, the subpoena power in Board of Appeals Rule 3-9 is the appropriate method for obtaining information, as outlined in Mauna Kea Anaina Hou v. Bd. of Land& Nat. Res., 136 Haw. 376, 391, 363 P.3d 224, 239 (2015). Accordingly, Appellant respectfully requests that the Board reconsider the denial and instead approve issuance of the subpoena duces tecum. We are happy to discuss these issues further if that would be helpful. Thank you, Ian From:Tavares, Sherilyn K. <Sherilyn.Tavares@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 3:50 PM To: Ian R. Wesley-Smith; Planning Board of Appeals Cc: Patrick K. Wong; Pause, Stephen (Steve); Braman, Eva; Kekai, Malia;Agustin, Noah; SalasFerguson, Sinclair; Lactaoen, Kawehilani S Subject: RE: 1'0 PROCESSING COMPANY INC (PL-BOA-2023-000065) Request for Issuance of Subpoena Duces Tecum CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good afternoon, 2