2003-10-22 Amended Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law Order Regarding Trial on Count IV of the Fifth Amended Complaint

Home

41. The relevant elements in Life of the Land that gave rise to equitable estoppel were: 1) good faith reliance; 2)upon existing law; 3)a substantial expenditure of monies (detrimental reliance); and 4)a subsequent change in the law. 42. A developer must show that his reliance on governmental conduct--whether it be issuance of a building permit,pre-permit assurances,or other official action--was both reasonable and in good faith. Id In most cases,if a municipality shows that a developer acted in bad faith, there is no vested right to project completion. Id This lack of good faith is viewed as an equitable estoppel defense,or simply as evidencing a lack of the reliance necessary to a prima facie claim of vested development rights. Id, citing De e v ple oow l 416 NW2d 854(Minn.App, 1987). 43. Unlike Life of the Land_ in the instant case there has been no subsequent change in the law. The State's land use laws are the same now as they were when Oceanside started the permitting process for the Hokuli'a development. Those land use laws required Oceanside to seek a reclassification of the Agricultural lands at that time,just as they do now. 44. Oceanside is presumed to know the governing laves and cannot rely on permission obtained from the County contrary to law. Oceanside disregarded advice from several of its own counsel to be more careful, as evidenced when Mr.Frye proceeded with the Hokuli'a development under his erroneous presumption that: (a)Ag-1 a zoning by the County of Hawaii alone was sufficient to assure compliance with FM chapter 205; (2)the"farm dwelling"requirement only applied to lands rated A and B under the ALISH rating system; and (3)all parts of the 1540-acre development did not need to be evaluated"in its entirety"for purposes of evaluating its proper land use designation. Test. R. Frye (7 19103). 45. "[W]here an administrative agency is charged with the responsibility of carrying out the mandate of a statute which contains words of broad and indefnnite meaning,courts accord 24